Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR
ROOPESH CHANDRA VARSHNEY
Shashi Bhushan Singh Sikarwar, S/o. Late Shri Keshav Singh Sikarwar – Appellant
Versus
Gajendra Singh Sikarwar, S/o. Late Shri Keshav Singh Sikarwar – Respondent
ORDER :
ROOPESH CHANDRA VARSHNEY, J.
Petitioner has filed this civil revision under Section 115 of CPC against the order dated 28/6/2023 passed by 2nd Additional Jude to the Court of 1st Civil Judge, Class-I, Jaura, District Morena in RCSA No. 29/2023; whereby, the application filed by petitioner under Order VII Rule 11 CPC has been rejected.
2. The facts giving rise to the lis are that respondent No. 1/plaintiff is real brother of petitioner. A suit for specific performance of agreement to sale and permanent injunction has been filed by the respondent No. 1 against the petitioner with the pleadings that the agriculture land as mentioned in the plaint are of the joint ownership and possession of the petitioner and respondent No. 1 and their all brothers and sisters. it was further pleaded that out of this land, the petitioner agreed to sale his share of 25 bigha to respondent No. 1 by executing an agreement on 7/9/2022 and an advance of Rs. 5 lacs was given in cash to the petitioner and land was agreed to be sold to the plaintiff by 5/4/2022 after its due partition. As per the terms of the agreement the respondent No. 1 had to pay Rs. 15,00,000/- to the petitioner by 22/11/2022 and
The validity of a cause of action for specific performance can arise even with pending conditions like partition, emphasizing the importance of the plaintiff's readiness to fulfill their financial ob....
A plaintiff must establish a clear cause of action in the plaint; if not, the suit can be dismissed under Order 7 Rule 11 of CPC.
The correctness of the averments in the plaint is not to be weighed at the stage of rejection of the plaint under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC.
Agreement to sell – Mere executing an agreement to sale would not create any right in favour of respondents.
An agreement to sell does not confer rights for impleadment in legal proceedings; proper remedies must be pursued through a suit for specific performance.
The court ruled that a plaint cannot be dismissed for lack of a cause of action if it provides sufficient information for adjudication, leaving the question of limitation to be determined during tria....
The main legal point established is that the nature of the suit, as determined by the reliefs claimed, influences the correct valuation for court fees and the application of Order VII Rule 11 CPC.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
