The court determined that a plaintiff can file a fresh suit without needing permission from the court if the original suit is returned for lack of jurisdiction.

ORDER

1. Aggrieved by the order passed on an Interlocutory Application filed under Order VII Rule 11(a) and (d) read with Section 151 of the CPC by the IIIrd Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Devanahalli C/c of IInd Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Devanahalli in O.S.No.46/2022 dated 30.01.2023, defendant Nos.2 and 3 therein have preferred this Civil Revision Petition.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their status before the Trial Court.

3. The plaintiff filed O.S.No.448/2011 before the Civil Judge and JMFC, Devanahalli, with the following prayers in respect of the suit schedule property:

"WHEREFORE, the plaintiff prays that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to pass a Judgment and Decree in his favour-

a) to declare that the plaintiff is the absolute owner and in possession in respect of the suit schedule properties and further to declare that the sale deed executed by the 1st defendant in favour of 2nd defendant dated 16.3.1992 is not binding on the plaintiff, and

b) to grant an Permanent Injunction restraining the 1st and 2nd defendants or their agents, servants, assignees or any body claiming through or under them from receiving the compensation award amount from the 3rd defendant, and

c) to grant such other relief/s as this Hon'ble Court may deems fit, in the interest of Justice and equity"

4. Defendant No.2 in the said suit preferred an application under Order VII Rule 10 of the CPC contending that the Court where the suit was instituted has no jurisdiction to try the same. The said Court allowed the said application and passed the following order:

"I.A.No.XIX filed U/o.VII Rule 10 of Civil Procedure Code by defendant No.2 is hereby allowed.

Office is hereby directed to return the plaint to the plaintiff. The plaintiff shall present the plaint before the court having pecuniary jurisdiction to try it, within law of limitation.

No order as to costs."

The said order was passed on 10.12.2021.

5. Thereafter, the plaintiff instead of taking back the plaint and presenting the same before the appropriate Court having jurisdiction, filed a fresh suit by way of O.S.No.46/2022 enclosing the earlier plaint and prayed for the following prayers:

"WHEREFORE, the plaintiff prays that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to pass a Judgment and Decree in his favour:-

a) to declare that the plaintiff is the absolute owner and in possession in respect of the suit schedule properties and further to declare that the sale deed executed by the 1st defendant in favour of 2nd defendant dated 16.03.1992 is not binding on the plaintiff, and

b) 'Alternatively, this Hon'ble Court comes to a conclusion that the plaintiff is not in possession in respect of the suit schedule properties, direct the defendants to deliver the vacant possession to the plaintiff

c) to grant an permanent injunction restraining the 1st and 2nd defendants or their agents servants, assignees or anybody claiming through or under them from receiving the compensation award amount from the 3rd defendant, and

d) to grant such other relief/s as this Hon'ble Court may deems fit, in the Interest of Justice and equity"

6. On the ground that the plaintiff could not have filed a fresh suit and no liberty was reserved to the plaintiff under Order XXIII Rule 1 of the CPC to file a fresh suit on the same cause of action and that the plaintiff was required to take back the plaint and represent the same before the Court havi