IMPORTANT POINT
Rejection of plaint – For considering petition under Order VII Rule 11 of CPC, Court has to take into account averments in plaint along with documents filed by plaintiff.

ORDER

This Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India aggrieved by the order dated 13.10.2022 in I.A.No.797 of 2021 in O.S.No.464 of 2021 on the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge, Ibrahimpatnam, Ranga Reddy District.

2. Heard Sri Pratap Narayan Sanghi, learned Senior Counsel for Sri Avadesh Narayan Sanghi, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri M. Avinash Reddy, learned Counsel for the respondent No.1.

3. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner/defendant No.2 submits that petitioner filed I.A.No.797 of 2021 in O.S.No.464 of 2021 on the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District at Ibrahimpatnam for rejection of the plaint and the same was dismissed by the Court below through the impugned order.

4. The learned Senior Counsel for the revision petitioner/defendant No.2 further submits that the suit schedule properties were gifted to her by her father/defendant No.1 through gift deeds dated 15.10.2014. The suit is filed in the year 2021 for cancellation of the said registered gift deeds and the suit is barred by limitation and there is no cause of action to file the suit, but the Court below without considering all these facts dismissed the petition for rejection of plaint.

5. The learned Senior Counsel for the revision petitioner further submits that the Court below has failed to appreciate the difference between the mistake of law and mistake of fact and the observation that the limitation is always a mixed question of law and the fact is quite erroneous. The Court below failed to consider that the monies as alleged by the plaintiff were transferred to the respondent No.3 for registration of properties and the respondent No.3 being a compnay is an independent legal entity and the privity of the contract is between the legal entity and the plaintiff and there is no privity of contract between the plaintiff/respondent No.1 and the revision petitioner. The Court below also ignored the admission of the plaintiff that the cause of action of the suit first arose when the defendant No.1 played fraud on the plaintiff and obtained illegal sale deeds in the year, 2007 and when the plaintiff came to know about the alleged fraud in the year, 2011 after he returned from USA and therefore the suit is barred by limitation and requested to allow the Civil Revision Petition.

6. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner in support of his contention placed reliance on the following Judgments:—

1. Board of Trustees of Port of Kandla vs. Hargovind Jasraj and another, (2013)3 SCC 182

2. Rajpal Singh vs. Saroj (Deceased) through LRs, AIR 2022 SC 2707

3. C.S. Ramaswamy v. V.K. Senthil, Air 2022 SC 4724

4. Raghwendra Sharan Singh v. Ram Pra-sanna Singh (dead) by Lrs., AIR 2019 SC 1430

5. Khatri Hotels Private Limited and another vs. Union of India and another, (2011) 9 SCC 126

7. On the other hand the learned Counsel for the respondent No.1/plaintiff vehemently opposed the Civil Revision Petition contending that considering the advice of the defendant No.1, the plaintiff paid total consideration of Rs.70,00,000/- to the defendant No.3 through cheque bearing No.364266 drawn on Canara Bank, S.R. Road Branch, Secunderabad. Thereafter, the defendant No.1 once again played mischief and transferred plots in favour of the defendant No.2. The defendant No.1 admitted his mischief and requested the plaintiff not to initiate legal action and he has given an undertaking to the plaintiff that he will pay the entire sale consideration after cancelling the sale deeds and gift settlement deeds on 02.12.2015. However, the defendant No.1 did not take any efforts to cancel the sale deeds and gift settlement deeds and the defendant No.1 issued confirmation letter assuring the plaintiff on 06.09.2019. Thereafter, no action has been taken in furtherance of the said assurance. Thus, the respondent No.1/plaintiff constrained to file O.S.No.464 of 2021 on the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge, Ibrahmapatnam, Ran