BOMBAY HIGH COURT - BENCH AT GOA
M. S. SONAK, J
MR. SHAIKH JINA. – Appellant
Versus
SHRI. SARVESH ANANT HEGDE. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. initial presentation of the case and revision application. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments presented by petitioner and respondent. (Para 3 , 4 , 9) |
| 3. legal standards regarding cause of action. (Para 6 , 11) |
| 4. judicial interpretations of plaint rejection. (Para 7 , 10) |
| 5. final decision and its implications. (Para 8 , 12) |
ORAL ORDER:
Heard Mr. K. Noorani, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. C. A. Coutinho, learned Counsel for the respondent.
2. This revision application takes exception to the order dated 7.1.2017 by which the learned Trial Judge has dismissed the petitioner's application under Order VII Rule 11(a) of the CPC seeking rejection of plaint for failure to disclose cause of action. The petitioner had also submitted that suit has rendered infructuous consequent upon the deposit of rent/compensation by the petitioner before the Rent Controller. The petitioner had invoked provision of Section 151 of CPC urging the dismissal of the suit on the ground that same has been rendered infructuous. Section 151 of CPC has also been invoked on the ground that devolution of the interest in the suit property upon the respondent/plaintiff was in the year 2013 i.e. after
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.