Back
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Gauri Godse, J
Ganesh Lakhaji Chudasama – Appellant
Versus
Geekay Enterprises – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. application seeks plaint rejection under order vii rule 11 cpc. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. suit barred by limitation under articles 47, 55, 58. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 3. collusive suits create continuous cause of action. (Para 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 4. property title traced through agreements and prior litigation. (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26) |
| 5. cited cases distinguish preliminary limitation rejection. (Para 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41) |
| 6. triable limitation issues require trial; application dismissed. (Para 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46) |
JUDGMENT:
1. This application is filed by defendant no. 7 praying for rejection of the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (“CPC”) on the ground that the suit is barred by law, and there is no cause of action.
2. The suit is filed seeking a declaration that the plaintiffs are in possession and entitled to develop the suit property under the Development Agreement dated 28th October 1997. The plaintiffs also prayed to direct defendant nos. 1 to 6 to pay to the plaintiffs an amount of Rs. 6,00,000/- received by them under the said agre
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
