Full Text
Translation output
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
C.R.P. 134/2011
ASHOK KUMAR Petitioner
Through: Mr. J.P. S. Sirohi, Advocate.
C.R.P. 134/2011
ASHOK KUMAR Petitioner
Through: Mr. J.P. S. Sirohi, Advocate.
VERSUS
GC SARKAR Respondent Tluough; None.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.K. BHASIN
14.09.2011 CM No. 17125/2011 Exemption as prayed for is granted subject to all just exceptions. This application stands disposed of accordingly.
14.09.2011 CM No. 17125/2011 Exemption as prayed for is granted subject to all just exceptions. This application stands disposed of accordingly.
C.R.P. 134/2011 & CM Nos. 17124/2011
I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
The petitioner is the defendant in a suit filed by the respondent-plaintiff challenging the elections for the Central Executive Committee of All India Scheduled
Caste and Scheduled Tribes Railway Employees Association, held on 21^' November, 2009 onthe ground that even his name was not included in the voters' listand elections were held illegally.
The petitioner-defendant filed an application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC for rejecting the plaint and the reasons given in that application, as noticed by the learned trial Court in the impugned order, are as under:-
"(a) the plaintiff has filed the present suit in representative character and has failed to comply with the provisions of Order 1
Rule 8 CPC.
(b) The plaintiffis guilty ofsuppressio veri and suggestiofalsi.
(c) The suit is bad for non-joinder of necessary party i.e. Ministry of Railways, Union of India.
I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
The petitioner is the defendant in a suit filed by the respondent-plaintiff challenging the elections for the Central Executive Committee of All India Scheduled
Caste and Scheduled Tribes Railway Employees Association, held on 21^' November, 2009 onthe ground that even his name was not included in the voters' listand elections were held illegally.
The petitioner-defendant filed an application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC for rejecting the plaint and the reasons given in that application, as noticed by the learned trial Court in the impugned order, are as under:-
"(a) the plaintiff has filed the present suit in representative character and has failed to comply with the provisions of Order 1
Rule 8 CPC.
(b) The plaintiffis guilty ofsuppressio veri and suggestiofalsi.
(c) The suit is bad for non-joinder of necessary party i.e. Ministry of Railways, Union of India.
C.R.P. 134/2011 page 1 of2
2011:DHC:9201 r- (d) The plaintiff had not raised any objection regarding the voter list immediately after its circulation and the objections, if any, were raised only by Sh. TC Das, Secretary of All India SC &
ST Railway Employees Association, NFRailways, Guwahati."
In my view none of the aforesaid grounds of challenge to the claim of the respondent-plaintiff attract the provisions ofOrder VII Rule 11 CPC and, therefore, the learned trial Court has not committed any illegality or irregularity in rejecting the petitioner's application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC. I do not find any merit in this revision petition andthesame is,therefore, dismissed in limine.
SEPTEMBER 14, 2011 nk
2011:DHC:9201 r- (d) The plaintiff had not raised any objection regarding the voter list immediately after its circulation and the objections, if any, were raised only by Sh. TC Das, Secretary of All India SC &
ST Railway Employees Association, NFRailways, Guwahati."
In my view none of the aforesaid grounds of challenge to the claim of the respondent-plaintiff attract the provisions ofOrder VII Rule 11 CPC and, therefore, the learned trial Court has not committed any illegality or irregularity in rejecting the petitioner's application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC. I do not find any merit in this revision petition andthesame is,therefore, dismissed in limine.
SEPTEMBER 14, 2011 nk
C.R.P. 134/2011 page 2 of2
2011:DHC:9201
2011:DHC:9201
JUDGMENT