Sardar Rawel Singh & Anr. v. Sardar Harjit Singh & Anr.

1. Whether the Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No

2. To be referred to Reporter or not? No

3. Whether the judgment should be reported No in the Digest? MANMOHAN SINGH, J.

1. In this suit, the defendant No.1 Sardar Harjit Singh has filed the application under Order 7 Rule 11 read with Section 151 CPC for rejection of the plaint. It is stated in the application that the plaintiff admittedly by virtue of sale deed executed on 25th May 2005 has received consideration amount of Rs.25 lakhs from Jaspal Kaur. It is mentioned in the application that in the plaint, the plaintiff has stated that Smt.Jaspal Kaur has withheld some payment as the possession of the said property is in occupation of M/s. Oriental Wollen Mills 2009:DHC:3824

2. In view of the statement made in the plaint as referred in Para 6, the defendant No.1 prays that the plaint be rejected for lack of cause of action in view of conflicting statements made by the plaintiffs in the other proceedings of pending litigation between the parties. In view of my finding given in the order passed in Suit No.690/05 separately, the present application is not maintainable. In case the plaintiff has made any contrary statement in two proceedings that will have to be decided at the time of trial. It is well settled law that the approach of the court while dealing with the application under Order 7Rule 11 is that the court should be rather hesitant to exercise the jurisdiction under Order 7 Rule 11 unless the circumstances warrants such exercise and the matter in issue falls within the four corners of requirement of suit.

3. It is also well settled law that the disputed question cannot be decided at the time of considering the application under Order 7 Rule

11. The power to reject the plaint can be exercised only if the court comes to the conclusion that even if all the allegations are taken to be proved, the plaintiff would not be entitled to any relief whatsoever.

4. A distinction must always be drawn in a case where the plaint on the face of it disclose no cause of action and in another where after considering the entire material on record, the court comes to the conclusion that there is no cause of action. In the first case, the plaint can be rejected but in the later case the plaint cannot be rejected.

5. In the case at hand, if the plaintiff has made an incorrect statement in the pleading, it is to be examined during the course of the present application is not maintainable and the same is dismissed. No costs. CS (OS) No.1246/2006 List this matter before Joint Registrar on 4th December, 2009.

MANMOHAN SINGH, J. SEPTEMBER 11, 2009 SD