Back
2023 Supreme(Online)(KAR) 7173
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 05TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE C.M.POONACHA
CRP No.200011/2019
BETWEEN:
1.
SMT. ANNAPOORNA W/O LATE LINGANAGOUDA PATIL
AGE: 76 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
R/O VENKATESHWARA COLONY, RAICHUR,
TQ. & DIST: RAICHUR-584101.
2.
SMT. SUVARNA W/O VIRUPAXAPPA SINGNAL
AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
C/O VIRUPAXAPPA EX-BJP TALUKA PRESIDENT,
R/O BANNIGIDADA CAMP, POST: GANGAVATHI,
TQ: GANGAVATHI, DIST: RAICHUR
3.
RAJASHEKARAGOUDA S/O LATE LINGANAGOUDA PATIL
AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O VENKATESHWARA COLONY, RAICHUR,
TQ. & DIST: RAICHUR.
...PETITIONERS
(NOTICE - SERVED)
AND:
SRI. DODDANAGOUDA PATIL
S/O TIMMANAGOUDA PATIL
AGE: 96 YEARS, OCC: RTD. GOVT. SERVANT,
R/O KAMBLIHAL, TQ. HUNUGUND,
DIST: BAGALKOT
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI.MAHANTESH PATIL, ADVOCATE)
2
This Civil Revision Petition is filed under Section 115
of CPC, praying to allow the petition by setting aside the
A plaint cannot be rejected for non-showing of any cause of action merely because the defendants dispute the plaintiff's plea regarding cause of action.
Headnote:
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners challenged the order dated 06.02.2019 passed on IA.No.9 in O.S.No.164/2014 by the learned Senior Civil Judge & JMFC Sindhanur, vide Annexure-F. The petitioners filed IA.No.9 under Order 7 Rule 11 R/w 151 CPC to reject the plaint for non-showing of any cause of action.
Finding of the Court:
The Trial Court vide order dated 06.02.2019 has clearly noticed that the application filed in IA.No.9 is to reject the plaint for want of showing any cause of action, whereas, in the plaint, the plaintiff/respondent has specifically mentioned dates alleging as to when the cause of action arose.
Issues: Whether the plaint should be rejected for non-showing of any cause of action.
Ratio Decidendi: Merely because petitioners/defendants are seeking to dispute the plea of respondent/plaintiff regarding cause of action, it cannot be said that is no cause of action to file the plaint.
Final Decision: The Civil Revision Petition fails and is accordingly rejected.
on
IA.No.9,
dated
06.02.2019
passed
in
O.S.No.164/2014 by the learned Senior Civil Judge & JMFC
Sindhanur, vide Annexure-F.
This petition is coming on for orders this day, Court
made the following:
ORDER
The present petition is filed challenging the order
dated
06.02.2019
passed
on
IA.No.9
in
O.S.No.164/2014.
2.
It is the case of petitioners that the
respondent filed a suit in O.S.No.164/2014 for
declaration of title, permanent injunction and further
relief's. The petitioners have entered appearance and
filed written statement contesting the suit of plaintiff-
respondent. The trial Court framed 10 issues vide
order
dated
21.12.2013.
On
16.07.2018,
the
petitioners filed IA.No.9 under Order 7 Rule 11 R/w
151 CPC to reject the plaint for non showing of any
3
cause of action. The respondents/plaintiffs filed
objections and contested the said application. The
Trial Court vide order dated 06.02.2019 dismissed
IA.No.9 filed by the defendants-petitioners. Being
aggrieved, the present petition is filed.
3.
I have perused the material available on
record.
4.
The
Trial
Court
vide
order
dated
06.02.2019 has clearly noticed that the application
filed in IA.No.9 is to reject the plaint for want of
showing any cause of action, whereas, in the plaint,
the plaintiff/respondent has specifically mentioned
dates alleging as to when the cause of action arose. It
is forthcoming from a copy of plaint produced along
with the above petition that at paragraph No.8, the
plaintiff has clearly mentioned the dates on which the
cause of action has arisen for filing the suit.
4
5.
The petitioners have contended that there
are two dates mentioned for cause of action and
hence, the doubt arises about there being any cause
of action filed the suit. It is clear that merely because
petitioners/defendants are seeking to dispute the plea
of respondent/plaintiff regarding cause of action, it
cannot be said that is no cause of action to file the
plaint.
6.
In view of the aforementioned and having
regard to the fact that the Trial Court has considered
the contentions put-forth by the parties and has
rightly passed the order dated 06.02.2019. I find no
grounds to interfere with the same.
7.
Hence, the Civil Revision Petition fails and
is accordingly rejected.
SD/-
JUDGE
msr
