Court : Mumbai
..... a written statement in this suit long back. 46. defendants no.3 has filed this notice of motion on 17th november, 2006 inter-alia praying for rejection of plaint under order 7 rule 11 of code of civil procedure, 1908 on various grounds. defendants no.3 has filed additional affidavits in this notice of motion raising additional objections in support of plea for dismissal of ..... of supreme court in case of popatand kotecha property vs. state bank of india staff association 2005 (7) scc 510 considered the issue whether a plaint can be rejected under order 7 rule 11(d) of code of civil procedure on the ground of limitation. paragraphs 7 to 11 of the said judgment in case of western coalfields ltd. (supra) which are relevant for the ..... in discharge of the undertaking of security given by the second respondent. the 1st respondent thereafter took out a notice of motion for rejection of the plaint purported to be under order 7 rule 11(a) of the code of civil procedure inter alia on the ground that the averments contained therein do not disclose a cause of action as the claim of unpaid insurance ..... high court is affirmed. we agree with the view taken by the trial court that a plaint cannot be rejected under order 7 rule 11(d) of the code of civil procedure. this decision is also rendered by the two hon'ble judges and they find that plaint cannot be rejected under rule 11 since question of limitation is a mixed question of fact and law. the .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Mumbai Goa
..... no.7/2014. by the impugned order the application (exhibit 13) filed by the respondents under order 7, rule 11 of the code of civil procedure has been allowed thereby rejecting the plaint as being barred by limitation as also the under the provisions of the land acquisition act 1894, (the act of 1894, for short). 3. the brief facts necessary for the ..... disposal of the appeal may be stated thus:- that the appellants filed civil suit no.7/2014 against the respondents for declaration that the suit property ..... 1995 sc:l 1995 air scw 3050) this court in terms held that since the act is a complete code, by necessary implication the power of the civil court to take cognizance of a case under section 9 of the cpc stands excluded, and civil court had no jurisdiction to go into the question of the validity or legality of the notification under section ..... 'ble supreme court in which while rejecting the challenge it was held thus: 2. it is seen that section 9 of the civil procedure code, 1908 gives jurisdiction to the civil court to try all civil suits, unless barred. the cognizance of a suit of civil nature may either expressly or impliedly be barred. the procedure contemplated under the act is a special procedure envisaged to effectuate public purpose .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Delhi
Reported in : ILR1968Delhi462
..... on a saledeed executed in their favor by defendants 6 and 7. later, they filed an application under order 6 rule 17 of the code of civil procedure for amendment of the plaint by incorporating therein an alternative plea that in case they are nto held to be the absolute owners of the property in dispute by ..... 49) the result of the fore-going discussion is that the plaintiffs application for withdrawal of the suit is dismissed and the plaint filed by them is rejected under order 7 rule ll(d) civil procedure code the plaintiffs will also pay costs incurred sc far by defendants i to 5. order accordingly. bar to the maintainability of ..... john stanley c.j. and banerji j. that the only course open to the court was to reject the plaint under section 54(c) of the code. it may be mentioned here that sections 424 and 54(c) of the civil procedure code then in force were more or less identical with section 80 and order 7 rule 11 (d ..... john stanley c.j. and banerji j. that the only course open to the court was to reject the plaint under section 54(c)< of the code. it may be mentioned here that sections 424 and 54(c) of the civil procedure code then in force were more or less iden- tical with section 80 and order 7 rule 11 ..... be limited to cases of misguide either of parties or of the matters in contest in the suit; to cases in which a material document has been rejected because it has nto borne the proper stamp, and to cases in which there has been an erroneous valuation of the subject of the suit. in .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2003(1)ALLMR48; 2002(6)BomCR546; (2003)2BOMLR167; 2003(1)MhLj299
..... not pertain to any point relating to the execution of the compromise decree. being so, question of invoking power under order vii, rule 11(d) of civil procedure code for rejection of the said plaint does not arise at all.8. indeed, the point of non-maintainability of the suit is sought to be raised by referring to the terms of the compromise decree and ..... between the parties and therefore considering the provisions of section 47 read with order vii, rule 11(d) of civil procedure code the plaint is liable to be rejected.4. referring to clauses 4 and 10 in the compromise decree passed on 19th march 1987 in regular civil suit no. 24 of 1987 between the parties to the proceedings, it was sought to be contended that ..... therefore, it is a case fit to invoke powers under order vii, rule 11(d) of civil procedure code and to reject the plaint.5. undoubtedly, order vii, rule 11(d) of civil procedure code provides that the plaint shall be rejected in case when the suit appears from the statement in the plaint to be barred by any law. the object behind the said provision of law is to avoid ..... the parties. rule. by consent, the rule is made returnable forthwith.2. the petitioner challenges the order dated 21st june 2002 rejecting the application filed by the petitioner for rejection of the plaint under order 7, rule 11(d) of the civil procedure code.3. it is the contention of the learned advocate for the petitioner that the suit has been filed for execution of the .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1999)101BOMLR544
..... 87 of the act every election petition shall be tried by the high court as nearly as may be in accordance with the procedure applicable under the code of civil procedure 1908 to the trial of suits. a suit which does not furnish cause of action can be dismissed.12. it is thus ..... which does not belong to him and, therefore, no cause of action is disclosed against the petitioner and hence, the plaint is liable to be rejected under order vii, rule 11 of civil procedure code.3. shri n. sardessai, the learned advocate appearing for the petitioner, submitted that though the provisions contained under order vii ..... even the disclosure of absence of cause of action in the course of evidence would empower the court to reject the plaint by exercise of powers under order vii, rule 11 of civil procedure code is not correct. it would be advantageous to reproduce the relevant observation by the apex court in the decision ..... can be considered by analysing the evidence produced by the plaintiff in support of such pleadings.4. order vii, rule 11 of civil procedure code reads thus:rejection of plaint. - the plaint shall be rejected in the following cases:(a) where it does not disclose a cause of action;(b) where the relief claimed is under valued ..... material on record, comes to the conclusion that there was no cause of action for the suit. in the latter case, obviously, the plaint cannot be rejected under order vii, rule 11, c.p.c.16. in the case in hand the respondents have filed the suit on the ground that .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1983KAR223; 1984(2)KarLJ185
..... plaint is primarily a question between the plaintiff and the state. how by an order relating to the adequacy of the court fee paid by the plaintiff, the defendant may feel aggrieved, it is difficult to appreciate. again, the jurisdiction inrevision exercised by the high court under section 115 of the code of civil procedure ..... proper valuation slip in terms of the first order and pay the deficit court fee thereon, the learned judge was bound to reject the plaint under order 7 rule 11 cpc which was peremptory in nature.40. sri channabasappa has sought to support the order of the learned judge.41. on a fairly ..... revised valuation slip on 17.6.1982. the said valuation slip to which defendant-2 againstin objected and even urged for rejection of the plaint under order 7 rule 11 of the cpc reads thus:revised valuation slippursuant to the order of the hon'ble court that the relief shall be valued under the ..... otherwise also, it was the plain duty of the court to record evidence and decide the question. without doing that, the trial court, could not have rejected the plaint at all. in this view also, 1 cannot uphold this contention of sri ramaswamy.44. as pointed out by bowen, l.j. in cropper -v.- ..... valuation slip, the learned judge, in my opinion, has rightly held that the same was not in conformity with his earlier order and has rightly rejected the same. sri channabasappa did not rightly seek to justify the same.30. before the learned judge, the plaintiffs while pressing for acceptance of the .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Delhi
Reported in : 1995IAD(Delhi)1411; 58(1995)DLT285; 1995(33)DRJ496
..... not affect the real situation which would depend upon the interpretation of the plaint read as a whole and specially the prayer clause in the same '.the court concluded the case was one for declaration and consequential relief and not for declaration simpliciter. (17) the code of civil procedure does not provide for a form of decree to be passed in a case of ..... be barred by any law ', and the defendant no.4 cannot be allowed to urge any ground by reference to clause (a) of order 7 rule 11 civil procedure code which contemplates rejection of a plaint where it does not disclose a cause of action; and that even on merits the application does not deserve to be allowed. (8) 1the suit was filed on 6 ..... ordinarily made, entertained and adjudicated at a preliminary stage of the suit but that is not a hard rule. order 7 rule 11 civil procedure code contemplates the `grounds' for rejection of the plaint; it does not contemplate or provide the `stage 'at which the court may exercise such jurisdiction. excepting the high court of allahabad and the judicial commissioner's court of ajmer, ..... the court so as to obstruct the smooth flow of trial in midstream. any other view to the contrary would open gate for the unscrupulous litigant filing an application for rejection of plaint and insisting on its disposal when the parties especially the plaintiff was before the court ready with the trial to proceed. such a defendant would be told by the .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Delhi
Reported in : 155(2008)DLT173
..... 19th july 2007 passed in i.a. no. 7904/2006 in cs(os) no. 558/2006 allowing the application under order vii rule 11 cpc filed by the respondents (hereinafter referred to as defendants) for rejection of the plaint on the ground that it does not disclose a cause of action.2. the case of the plaintiff in the trial court was that ..... 2004 for rs. 2 lac as part payment (bayana) issued by the plaintiff in favour of defendant no. 1 was dishonoured and, therefore, the plaintiff was guilty under section 420 ipc and section 138 of the negotiable instrument act. it is also a matter of fact that after sending the said legal notice the cheque of rs. 2 lac was also ..... a whole to find out whether it discloses a cause of action and if it does, then the plaint cannot be rejected by the court exercising the powers under order vii, rule 11 of the code. essentially, whether the plaint discloses a cause of action, is a question of fact which has to be gathered on the basis of the averments made in the ..... plaint in its entirety taking those averments to be correct. a cause of action is a bundle of facts which .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Delhi
Reported in : 2006(88)DRJ837
..... held as under::-132. it is trite that a party should not be unnecessarily harassed in a suit. an order refusing to reject a plaint will finally determine his right in terms of order 7 rule 11 of the code of civil procedure. 133. the idea underlying order 7 rule 11(a) is that when no cause of action is disclosed, the courts will not ..... under this provision, the court has to look into the plaint. this concept has been extended by judicial pronouncement of various courts ..... the opponent as correct. despite tentative admission of such correctness, the plaint does not disclose a complete or even partial cause of action or the relief claimed is barred by law and thus, the plaint is liable to be rejected within the provisions of order 7 rule 11 of the code of civil procedure. plain language of this rule shows that for determination of an application ..... so as to take within its ambit even the documents filed by the plaintiff along with plaint .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Kerala
Reported in : 133CompCas546(Ker); 2008(38)PTC554(Ker)
..... survives for consideration is as to whether the ernakulam court has territorial jurisdiction by virtue of the provisions in the code of civil procedure. admittedly, sections 16 to 19 of the civil procedure code have no application to the present suit. under section 20 of the civil procedure code the suit is to be instituted in that court within the local limits of whose jurisdiction the defendants or each ..... nullity. (vide paras. 25 to 27 of dhodha house v. s.r. maingi  32 ptc 1).15. this is not a case where the plaint is liable to be rejected under order vii, rule 11 (a), civil procedure code for the reason that the plaint does not disclose a cause of action. this is really a case where the cause of action alleged in the ..... liverpool and london s.p. and i association ltd. v. m.v. sea success : (2004)9scc512 . an order refusing to reject the plaint under order vii, rule 11, civil procedure code amounts to a preliminary judgment the remedy against which is an appeal and not a writ petition under article 227 of the constitution of india. (vide paragraphs 128 and 139 ..... issues incorporating the above objections. the petitioners also filed exhibit p8 petition (i.a. no. 2577 of 2005) under order vii, rule 11 read with sections 21 and 151, civil procedure code for rejection of the plaint on the aforementioned objections. accordingly, the court below on july 25, 2005, framed two preliminary issues as follows:1. whether the second additional district court, ernakulam, has jurisdiction .....Tag this Judgment!