THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA

ORDER:

This Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India by the petitioners-defendant Nos.1 to 2 aggrieved by the order passed in IA No.658 of 2017 in O.S No.67 of 2016 on the file of the XII Additional District Judge, Vikarabad, Ranga Reddy District.

2. Heard Sri C.Raghu, leaned Senior Counsel, representing Sri R.Giri Kumar learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri K.Ramesh Kumar, representing Ms.S.Munjula Devi, learned counsel for the respondents.

3. The petitioner Nos.1 & 2 herein are the defendant Nos.1 & 2 therein and respondent No.1 herein is the plaintiff therein. For the sake of convenience, the parties will be hereinafter referred to as they are arrayed before the learned trial Court.

4. The brief facts of the case are that the plaintiff has filed a suit for specific performance and praying the Court to direct the defendants to execute the register sale deed in respect of suit schedule property in favor of the plaintiff in terms of Agreement of sale, dated 08.01.2016, conveying title to the plaintiff for sale consideration amount of Rs.55,00,000/- and in alternatively to refund the earnest money of Rs.23,00,000/- paid in consequent to the agreement of sale dated 08.01.2016.

5. During the pending of suit, the defendants have filed an application IA No.658 of 2017 in OS No.67 of 2016 under order VII Rule 11 CPC to reject the plaint filed by the plaintiff on the ground that the plaint did not disclose cause of action and the plaintiff without any existence of cause of action has filed the above suit for specific performance in respect of the suit schedule property against defendants more particularly defendant Nos.1 & 2. As per the term and conditions of the Agreement of sale, dated 08.01.2016, at Para No.5 & 6, the vendor shall resolve the boundary dispute over the schedule property and the vendor has already executed a sale deed in favor of the vendee in respect of the land in Sy No.129/A, admeasuring Ac.1-06 gts., situated at Gerpetpally Village Vikarabad Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, vide document bearing No.159/2016 as security to the advance sale consideration and also agreed between the parties that in case of failure to resolve the problem over the schedule property covered under the present agreement of sale, vendor shall return the advance sale consideration of Rs.13,00,000/- to vendee or otherwise, the vender shall loose his right over the said schedule property covered under the registered document bearing No.159/2016.

6. It is averred before the trial Court that under the Agreement of sale, dated 08.01.2016, all the issues were decided amicable without infringement of rights of any parties and no doubt remains to execute regular registered sale deed in favor of plaintiff after receipt of balance amount in respect of suit property and the suit and agreement no cause of action arose or exit to the plaintiff to file the suit or seek relief under the specific relief Act, 1963 and that as there is no pleading in the plaint in respect of the clauses which are incorporated in the Agreement of Sale, dated 08.01.2016, as such there is no requirement of conducting trial in the suit filed by the plaintiff, moreover the plaintiff filed the suit basing on the created document without disclosing any actual cause of action and sought for rejection of the plaint.

7. The plaintiff filed counter-affidavit before the trial Court and denied the averments made in the petition and contended that ex facie an application made seeking the relief of rejection of plaint is not maintainable, untenable, unsustainable and that the plaintiff has filed the suit for specific performance in respect of the suit schedule property against defendant No.1 and 2 and others and that the entire plaint shows the real cause of action of the suit, as such, the petition filed by the defendants seeking rejection of the plaint liable to dismissed in limini.

8. The plaintiff furt