Court : Mumbai
..... prior act of the board which would have been valid if that regulation had not been made. 19. order 7 rule 11(a) and (d) of code of civil procedure, 1908 read thus:- 11. 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, and the plaintiff ..... order dated 7th april 2011 the learned district judge-1 nashik allowed the application (exhibit 28) filed by the defendant under order 7 rule 11(d) of the code of civil procedure 1908 and rejected the plaint. the appellant has impugned the said order and judgment dated 7th april, 2011 in this appeal which order and judgment is deemed to be decree within the meaning ..... judgment dated 7th april, 2011 passed by the learned district judge 1, nashik allowing the application filed by the respondent under order 7 rule 11(d) of the code of civil procedure, 1908 and thereby rejecting the plaint. some of the relevant facts for the purpose of deciding this appeal are as under :- 3. on 18th august 2005 the appellant (original plaintiff) filed a suit ..... by the defendant. 6. on 28th october, 2009 the defendant filed an application under order vii rule 11(d) of the code of civil procedure, 1908 inter alia praying for rejection of the plaint. it is averred in the said application that the plaint was filed by mr.siddharth sachdev claiming to be a director of the plaintiff company. it is submitted that order 29 rule .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2002(2)BomCR537
..... the suit and takes away a vested right of limitation or any other valuable right accrued to the defendant.(2) an order rejecting the plaint.(3) an order refusing leave to defend the suit in an action under order 37, code of civil procedure.(4) an order rescinding leave of the trial judge granted by him under clause 12 of the letters patent.(5) an ..... maintainability of letters patent appeal. the submission of mr. pratap is that the order passed by the learned single judge refusing to reject the plaint for failure to disclose a cause of action under order 7, rule 11(a) of code of civil procedure (c.p.c.) is not appealable as it is not a judgment within the meaning of clause 15 of the letters ..... actually according to law, on the allegations contained in the plaint, defendant no. 2 was agent of the union of india or not. mere formal allegation ..... on a meaningful and not formal reading of a plaint it is manifest that the plaint is vexatious or meritless in the sense of not disclosing a clear right to sue trial court should exercise its power under order vii, rule 11, code of civil procedure, and should reject the plaint. so it is meaningful reading of the plaint which is required. it is to be seen if .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2007(3)ALD398; 2007(3)ALT245
..... controversy herein and the consideration should be confined to the applicability of order vii rule 11 and section 151 of the code of civil procedure.14. the points that arise for consideration in these revisions are:1. whether the plaint is liable to be rejected or the suit is liable to be dismissed for the reasons relied on by the revision petitioners?2. to what ..... deal with the property as per the land encroachment act, 1905 and section 14 thereof bars the jurisdiction of civil court. the suit is, hence, not maintainable and the plaint be rejected under order vii rules 10 and 11 and section 151 of the code of civil procedure.5. the plaintiff resisted the petition claiming that as the cancellation of the patta was opposed to law ..... . 261 of 1999 filed under order vi1 rules 10 and ll(d) and section 151 of the code of civil procedure to reject the plaint, by an order dated 7-2-2005 of the principal junior civil judge, addanki, the petitioners therein/defendants 1 and 2 in the suit filed civil revision petition no. 1405 of 2006, while the legal representatives of defendants 3 and 4, and ..... and principles of natural justice and as the defendants are trying to forcibly evict the plaintiff without following the procedure under the land encroachment act .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2003(4)ALD450; 2004(1)ALT358
..... defendant's application filed in i.a. no. 1593/2001 in o.s. no. 654/1993 on the file of the vii senior civil judge, city civil court, hyderabad to reject the plaint for want of notice under section 80 code of civil procedure. the 1st respondent herein is the plaintiff who filed the said suit for recovery of the damages of rs. 5,00,000/- against ..... is stated that the 1st defendant filed i.a. no. 1337/1998 under order vii, rule 11 r/w section 151 code of civil procedure to reject the plaint contending that the criminal court acquitted the plaintiff invoking exception 9 of section 499 ipc and the entire foundation of the case made by the plaintiff rests on the observations made by the ii additional metropolitan sessions ..... by the plaintiff claiming the damages for malicious prosecution is false and fictitious and, therefore, the plaint may be rejected under order vii, rule 11 cpc to avoid harassment. a counter was filed by the plaintiff in the said application and the learned vii senior civil judge, city civil courts, hyderabad by order dated 15/04/1999 dismissed the said i.a. no. 133/98 ..... decided after completion of the trial alone but the plaint cannot be rejected as sought for by the 1st defendant under order vii, rule 11 (d) cpc.13. therefore, i do not see any merits in the civil revision petition and the court below has rightly rejected the said application of the petitioner herein. accordingly, the civil revision petition is dismissed. there shall be no order .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 1996(3)ALT280
..... rejection of the plaint on other grounds does not amount to a decree. it is further ..... 'decree' for the reasons aforesaid.13. in the case of shamsher singh v. n. rajinder prashad, air 1973 sc 284 it is held mat an order rejecting a plaint under order 7 rule 11 of the code of civil procedure for non-payment of additional court fees demanded is appealable as a decree.14. relying on major s.s. khanna v. brig. f.j. dillon ..... rejecting a plaint under order 7 rule 11 only amounts to a decree whereas ..... court under order 6 rule 5 of the code of civil procedure. a division bench of the madhya pradesh high court held that since an order rejecting a plaint is treated as decree by legal fiction created by section 2(2) of the code of civil procedure, it must be confined to cases of rejection of plaint expressly provided in the code of civil procedure and, therefore, it is clear that an order .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1999All109
..... or at least, against respondents nos. 8 to 12 and for pronouncement of judgment at once. 44. order 7, rule 11 of the code of civil procedure deals with rejection of plaint and it reads as under: '11. rejection of plaint.-- the plaint shall be rejected to the following cases: (a) where it docs not disclose a cause of action ; (b) where the relief claimed is undervalued and the ..... as written statement, and, as such the testamentary suit was a suit for all purposes under the code of civil procedure and no exception could be taken to invocation of order 7 rule 11, c.p.c. we find no ..... all rigours of the code of civil procedure would be applicable. the hon'ble judge further relied on rule 39 of chapter xxx of the allahabad high court rules to say that when the matter become contentious the application for letters of administration would be treated and registered as a suit and the petition was to be read as a plaint and the objection ..... the plaint itself and not from a reading of the defence or other documents. 46. it appears that a second preliminary objection was also raised before the hon'ble single judge, concerning the application under order 7, rule 11, c.p.c. it was contended before him that in a proceeding for letters of administration all the provisions of the code of civil procedure .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : JT2003(9)SC218; 2003(10)SCALE1; (2004)9SCC512
..... court in prahladrai agarwalla and ors. v. smt. renuka pal and ors. : air1982cal259 wherein it has been held that an order under order 7 rule 11 of the code of civil procedure refusing to reject a plaint is not a judgment, is not apposite.122. in the said judgment, however, the judgment of this court in shah babulal khimji (supra) was not taken into consideration ..... 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 ..... by this court.135. 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.136. the idea underlying order 7 rule 11a is that when no cause of action is disclosed, the courts will not unnecessarily ..... 11 of the code of civil procedure, the rights conferred upon the parties are determined one way or the other, stricto sensu it would not be an interlocutory order but having regard to its traits and trappings would be a preliminary judgment.132. it is true that in shah babulal khimji (supra) it is stated that an order rejecting the plaint would be appealable but .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Delhi
Reported in : AIR1992Delhi118; 1992(1)ARBLR242(Delhi); 48(1992)DLT414
..... vexatious and meritless and could exercise the power under order vii, rule i i of the code of civil procedure for rejecting the plaint and the court can also examine the party under order x of the code of civil procedure so that bogus litigation can be shot down at the earliest stage. i do not think that this judgment applies to the facts of the present case ..... order1. vide this order i shall decide the aforesaid two applications moved by the defendants seeking rejection of the plaint under order vii rule i i of the code of civil procedure.2. elaborate oral arguments have been addressed by counsel for the plaintiff. counsel for the applicants had addressed very brief oral arguments, however, both the parties have filed written arguments. ..... perused by me. in my opinion, nothing mentioned therein meets with the points discussed by me in detail above.70. in view of the above discussion, i hold that the plaint is not liable to be rejected under order vii, rule i i of the code of civil procedure. the applications are dismissed.71. applications dismissed. ..... in view of the averments made in the plaint which cannot be brushed aside on the short ground .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Chennai
Reported in : 2006(5)CTC848
..... court. that was not a fact in the present case. this is an application filed under order vii rule 11 of the code of civil procedure for rejecting the plaint, which is a drastic relief sought against the plaintiff, who knocked the doors of the court for justice. however, in the ..... 2 to 7. they filed an application in i.a. no. 18151 of 2004 under order vii rule 11 of the code of civil procedure to reject the plaint, since the same does not disclose a valid cause of action. the trial court, upon hearing the arguments of the learned counsel ..... of the trial court rejecting the application filed by the petitioners under order 7 rule 11 of the code of civil procedure for rejection of plaint on the above said grounds.7. rule 11 of the order vii of the code of civil procedure provided that a plaint could be rejected (1) if the plaint did not disclose a ..... supreme court has held that for the purpose of deciding the application filed under rule 11 of order vii of the code of civil procedure, the averments in the plaint are germane and the plea taken by the defendant in the written statement would be wholly irrelevant at that stage. the ..... cause of action; (2) where the relief claimed was undervalued and the plaintiff, on being required by the court to correct the valuation within the time to be fixed by the court, failed to do so; (3) where the relief claimed was properly valued, but the plaint .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Chennai
Reported in : (2008)1MLJ180
..... while dealing with an application filed by the defendant under order 7 rule 11(c) of code of civil procedure to reject the plaint on the basis that the plaint was insufficiently stamped, it was held that in the absence of a specific application under section 149 of code of civil procedure and order passed by the court granting extension of time for payment of court-fee, the ..... petitioner are relating to the deficit court fee not paid on the plaint and therefore, it can be a ground for rejecting the plaint under order vii rule 11 of code of civil procedure, in the absence of an application filed under section 149 of code of civil procedure.21. on the other hand, the rejection of the memorandum of appeal cannot be made on the same grounds ..... deficit court fees should be paid only after obtaining necessary leave from the court and the analogy applicable in respect of rejection of plaint is also applicable to the rejection of appeal under order xli rule 3 of code of civil procedure. to substantiate her contention, she would rely upon the following judgments of this court, viz.,(i) 2007 (4) mlj 433 p. sakthivel v ..... available under order vii rule 11 of code of civil procedure. in fact, there is a provision .....Tag this Judgment!