Respondent by paying a Court fee of Rs.1 ,10,526/- filed a suit for recovery of RS.1 ,08,03,110/- as damages from the revision-petitioners under three heads i.e. loss of earnings on account of denial of employment, loss of career development and damages for mental agony .In that suit revision petitioners filed a petition under Rule 11 of Order VII CPC to reject the plaint on various grounds. The learned Judge by the order under revision dismissed the same on the ground that the truth or otherwise of the allegations in the plaint will have to be decided only at the time of trial. Hence this revision.

2. The learned counsel for the revision petitioners took me through the entire plaint and all the documents filed therewith in minute detail and argued the case for almost a day by raising several contentions.

3. His first contention is that inasmuch as the trial Court did not advert to the contentions raised and dismissed the petition through a mute order the same is unsustainable and contended that since the criminal case for defamation filed by the respondent in connection with the telegram issued by the revision-petitioners was quashed by this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C., on