Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: rejection of plaint code of civil procedure Page 6 of about 33,193 results (0.161 seconds)

Mar 21 2007 (HC)

Bijoy Nagar Tea Company Ltd. Vs. Narsing Dasgupta and ors.

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : 2008(1)CHN97

..... 20. this court is now required to adjudicate how far the learned trial court was justified in rejecting the application.21. order 7 rule 11 of the code of civil procedure is as follows: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 ..... seems to be clearly barred on the facts stated in the plaint itself. the suit as framed is prima facie barred by the law of limitation, provisions of the specific relief act as also under order 2 rule 2 of the code of civil procedure.36. reference was also made to an earlier decision of ..... 85 of 2005.2. the present petitioner, as defendant no. 2, filed an application under order 7 rule 11 read with section 151 of the code of civil procedure before the learned trial court on 3rd january, 2006. the opposite party/plaintiff filed a written objection thereto on 2nd march, 2006.3. it was ..... this bench in the case of m.n. roy and anr. v. snehasis bagchi reported in 2003 (2) chn 361. it was observed therein that there is a gulf of difference between the expression 'the plaint does not ..... court, it was submitted by mr. saktinath mukherjee, learned senior counsel for the petitioner that the power of the court to reject a plaint under order 7 rule 11 of the civil procedure code can very well be exercised at any stage of the proceeding. in this context, mr. mukherjee referred to the decision in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 17 2011 (HC)

M/S Bhatia Industries and Others Vs. M/S Pandey Industries and Others

Court : Delhi

..... defendants enjoy goodwill and reputation throughout the country ." 4. i.a. 13661/2009 has been filed by the defendants under order vii rules 10 and 11 of the code of civil procedure for rejection of the plaint on the ground that this court has no territorial jurisdiction to try this suit as no cause of action arose within the jurisdiction of this court.5. i ..... view on the issue of jurisdiction without giving opportunity to the parties to lead evidence in this regard.11. order vii rule 11 of the code of civil procedure, which provides for rejection of plaint, to the extent it is relevant, empower the court to reject the plaint where it does not disclose a cause of action or where the suit appears from the statement in the ..... of action did not arise in the territorial jurisdiction of this court, it would not be a case of the plaint not disclosing a cause of action and, therefore would not entail its rejection under order vii rule 11(a) of the code of civil procedure. in such a case, the court, in view of the provisions contained in order vii rule 10 of the ..... code of civil procedure, is required to return the plaint to the plaintiff to present it to the court in which the suit should have .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 06 2011 (HC)

Rasiklal S Maradia and 1 Vs Icici Bank Limited and 1

Court : Gujarat

..... -plaintiffs for being presented in drt, mumbai in exercise of power under order 7 rule 10 of the code of civil procedure. it is submitted that as such the application below exhs. 20 & 21 were under order 7 rule 11 of the code of civil procedure to reject the plaint on the ground that considering the provisions of the recovery of debts due to banks and financial institutions ..... the suit filed by the bank before the drt, mumbai, the respondent bank, took out two chamber summons vide exhs. 20 and 21 for rejection of the plaint under order 7 rule 11(a) of the code of civil procedure mainly on the ground that suit is barred in view of the provisions of the recovery of debts due to banks and financial institutions act ..... summons was taken out by the defendants under order 7 rule 11 of the code of civil procedure for rejection of the plaint and the said chamber summons was allowed the plaint was returned to the plaintiffs for being presented to the drt, mumbai under order 7 rule 10 of the code of civil procedure. it is submitted that the said order was challenged by the company before the ..... -appellants herein for being presented before drt, mumbai under order 7 rule 10 of the code of civil procedure instead of rejecting the said plaint. being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned order dated 10.1.2008 passed by the learned city civil court, ahmedabad below exhs. 20 & 21 passed in civil suit no. 1431 of 2003, the appellants original plaintiffs no. 1 and 3 have preferred .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 03 2012 (SC)

A. Nawab John and ors. Vs. V.N. Subramaniyam

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... statement and also filed application in i.a.no.3 of 2006, invoking order 7 rule 11 of the code of civil procedure to reject the plaint. a week thereafter, on 29 12 2005, the plaintiffs filed i.a.no.1 of 2006, seeking amendment of the plaint.9. i.a.no.1 of 2006 filed by the plaintiffs was allowed by an order dated 16 ..... " as if the court fee had been paid in the first instance. indisputably, the expression "document" appearing under section 4 and 5 takes within its sweep a plaint contemplated under the code of civil procedure (hereinafter 'the code' for short).it may be pertinent to mention that under section 28[1] of the court fees act 1870, it is categorically declared that "no document which ..... is paid on a 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 in revision exercised by the high court under section 115 of the code of civil procedure is strictly conditioned by ..... on which the abovementioned ias were allowed) because of the amendment to the civil courts act;2. the plaintiffs did not invoke section 149 of the code, while seeking the condonation of delay in representing the plaint and making good the deficit court fee, therefore, the plaint ought to have been rejected;3. the delay in representation was condoned without notice to the defendant. in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 17 2014 (HC)

Narasus Coffee Company Vs. R.P.Sarathy

Court : Chennai

..... of the view that the revision petitioners are entitled to seek an order under order 7 rule 11 (a) and (d) of the code of civil procedure, to reject the plaint, on the ground that there is no legal cause of action and the relief sought for is not a common law remedy, but contrary ..... a.no.865 of 2009 was filed by the revision petitioners / defendants, under order 7 rule 11 of the code of civil procedure (herein after referred to as the code), seeking an order to reject the plaint, on the ground that the first respondent / plaintiff, a retired partner is not entitled to partition and claim any ..... to indian partnership act and hence, the same could be construed only as an abuse of process of law and court.43. in the result, this civil ..... v. asstt. charity commr., reported in (2004) 3 scc137 it was held by the hon'ble apex court that plaint could be rejected under order 7 rule 11 (a) cpc, when the plaint does not disclose a cause of action. the cause of action should be a cause of action, as per law for ..... action taken against the member of the club, the defendant club challenged the order granting interim injunction and order dismissing the application to reject the plaint, by way of civil revision petition before this court, wherein this court held that the revision preferred under article 227 of the constitution of india was maintainable .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 17 2014 (HC)

Natarajan Vs. Jacob Manohar

Court : Chennai

..... will lie. ....". (x) k.s.geetha v. stanleybuck [air2003madras146, wherein in paragraph no.9, it has been held as follows:- ".9. order vii, rule 11 of code of civil procedure deals with rejection of plaint. once the plaint is rejected, then obviously nothing is pending before the court. that order is formal expression of an adjudication, which so far as regards the court expressing it, conclusively determines ..... . ... from a reading of the above, it is clear that the revision is not maintainable since the rejection of the plaint is a decree under the code of civil procedure, and even if the plaint is rejected on some other grounds, the remedy is only an appeal under section 96 of cpc.". (xiii) govindarajan padayachi v. premananda vijayakumar @ prem anand [2013 (6) ctc467, wherein in paragraph no.9 ..... the rights of the parties. in fact, s.2 of the code of civil procedure which defines the term decree specifically states that the decree shall be deemed to include rejection of the plaint. section 96 of the code deals with appeal from original decrees. the claim of the respondents is that the order rejecting plaint being the decree by the trial court, the only remedy, if .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 25 2015 (HC)

Prabhudayal Vs. Shantabai and Others

Court : Mumbai Nagpur

..... entertain the suit or bar to the suit created by any law which is in force for the time being. under order vii, rule 11, the code of civil procedure, the provision enabling the court to reject the plaint either under clause (a) or (d) is provided. the court need not refer to any amount of evidence as merely on the basis of perusal of ..... legal position and reading the impugned order, it must be concluded that the learned judge has committed error of law in the facts and circumstances to reject the plaint under order vii, rule 11 of the code of civil procedure. hence, the order. the impugned order is not sustainable. it is quashed and set aside. parties are directed to approach the trial court on 20 ..... the plaint, the plaint may be rejected. the legal position in this regard that order vii, rule 11 of the code of civil procedure and order xiv, rule 2 of the code of civil procedure operate at different stages of the suit and scope of the provision was explained by hon'ble ..... reading as a whole must disclose cause of action which can be entertained by civil court. without these preliminaries, the plaint may be rejected in terms of order vii, rule 11 of the code of civil procedure. however, as contemplated under order xiv, rules 1 and 2 of the code of civil procedure, unless the plaint is manifestly vexatious or meritless not disclosing any clear right to suit when issues .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 23 1999 (HC)

M/S. Crescent Petroleum Ltd. Vs. M.V. monchegorsk and Another

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR2000Bom161; 2000(3)ALLMR714; 2000(1)BomCR645; (2000)1BOMLR297

..... it discloses no cause of action'. the court has the power under order 7, rule 11(a) of the code of civil procedure to reject the plaint at the threshold. but in this case the court would reject the plaint only if it comes to the conclusion that necessary averments and material has not been placed before the court to ..... law. while exercising the power of rejecting the plaint, the court has to act with utmost caution. this power ought to be used only when the court is absolutely sure that the plaintiff does not have an arguable case at all. the exercise of this power though arising in civil procedure, can be said to belong ..... greater the caution in exercise thereof. this power has been specifically incorporated in order 6, rule 16 (c) of the code of civil procedure after 1-2-1977. it has been exercised on very rare occasions. it is an abuse of the process when facts germane to the issue are ..... mr. mukherjee prima facie is not tenable. it is no doubt true that the high court has inherent powers by virtue of section 151 of the code of civil procedure, 1908, letters patent and article 215 of the constitution of india to prevent the abuse of its process. it is axiomatic that greater the power, ..... the words 'abuse of the process of the court occurred for the first time on 1-2-1977 in order 6, rule 16 of the code of civil procedure, this power was immanent in and arose from a high court being a court of record under the letters patent as well as article 215 of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 27 2007 (HC)

Venture Global Engineering Company Vs. Satyam Computer Services Ltd. a ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : 2007(3)ALD433; 2007(3)ALT471; 2007(3)ARBLR150(AP); [2007]138CompCas779(AP)

..... appeal is as to whether the court below was justified in rejecting the plaint, exercising its jurisdiction under order 7 rule 11 of the code of civil procedure?20. it is apt to extract order vii rule 11 of the code of civil procedure, for ready reference and better appreciation, which is thus:11. rejection of plaint:the plaint shall be rejected in the following cases:a. where it does not disclose ..... the act, 1996.12. after the institution of the suit, the defendant no. 1 filed an application i.a. no. 2042 of 2006, under order vii rule 11 of the code of civil procedure, to reject the plaint on various grounds.13. it is settled law that the courts while exercising their jurisdiction, provided under order vii rule 11 of the ..... , secunderabad, allowing the application .a. no. 2042 of 2006 in o.s. no. 80 of 2006, and rejecting the plaint, while exercising its jurisdiction under order vii rule 11 read with section 151 of the code of civil procedure.3. appellant is the plaintiff and the respondents are the defendants, in the suit, before the court below.4. for the sake of convenience, in this .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 12 2009 (HC)

K. Nagarathnamma Vs. Sree Sreenivasa Financial Services Rep. by Its Pa ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : 2009(5)ALT167

..... is filed under order vii rule 11(c) and (d) of the code of civil procedure (hereinafter in short referred to as 'the code') for the purpose of convenience.12. order vii rule 11 of the code deals with rejection of plaint and order vii rule 11(c) of the code specifies that the plaint shall be rejected in the following cases where the relief claimed is properly valued but ..... , kurnool.7. the said application was filed by the petitioner/defendant under order vii rule 11(c) and (d) of the code of civil procedure praying for rejection of the plaint. the learned judge after recording the respective stands taken by the parties in the affidavit filed in support of the application and the counter, having formulated the point for consideration ..... according to law defendant no. 2 was not agent of the union of india and that being so plaint does not disclose any cause of action against the latter.i, therefore, accept the application and reject the plaint with costs under order vii rule 11, code of civil procedure against the union of india, defendant no. 1.the learned judge, in fact, followed the legal proposition ..... 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 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 .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //