Dismissed

Mr. Ananta Sitaram Naik and Ors. v. Mr. Tarlok Singh Lungani and Ors.

Bombay HC23 Sept 2019CRA/231/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Civil Revision Application challenging a Trial Court order rejecting an application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC was dismissed. The court held that Trial Court observations on rejection are for preliminary disposal only and do not preclude the suit from being tried on merits.

What did the court decide?

Civil Revision Application rejected with no order as to costs.

Mr. Ananta Sitaram Naik and Ors. Vs Mr. Tarlok Singh… — Specific Performance | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

Pradnya Bhogale 1 21 cra 231-19.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO.231 OF 2019

¶4

Ananta Sitaram Naik and Ors. … Applicants
Vs.

¶5

Tarlok Singh Lungani and Ors.… Respondents

¶6

Mr. Rohit D. Joshi for the applicant.

¶7

CORAM: M. S. KARNIK, J.
DATE : 23rd SEPTEMBER, 2019.

¶8

P. C.:

¶9

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants.

¶10

2. The applicants are the original defendants.

¶11

The plaintiffs had filed a suit for specific performance of
agreement dated 12.01.2013. The defendants had filed an
application under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure

¶12

stating that the suit as filed by the plaintiffs is without any cause
of action and the suit is barred by law of limitation. The Trial
Court has rejected the said application filed by the defendants
below Exhibit 22. I have gone through the plaint and order
passed by the Trial Court. In view of the reasons recorded, I do
not see any reason to interfere with the order passed by the Trial
Court.

¶13

1 of 2

¶14

Pradnya Bhogale 2 21 cra 231-19.doc

¶15

3.The principal contention of the defendants was that
the suit as filed is not within limitation. Learned counsel for the
applicants would submit that the observations made by the Trial
Court while deciding the application made by the defendants
under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure will come
in the way of defendants when the suit is to be decided on merits.

¶16

4.Needless to mention that the observations made by the
Trial Court are for the purpose of considering whether the plaint
deserves to be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of
Civil Procedure for want of cause of action. Further needless to
mention that the Trial Court shall obviously decide the suit on its
own merits without being influenced by any observations made in
the impugned order.

¶17

5. With these observations, the petition is rejected with

¶18

no order as to costs.

¶19

 ( M. S. KARNIK, J. )

¶20

2 of 2

Mr. Ananta Sitaram Naik and Ors. v. Mr. Tarlok Singh Lungani and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr. Ananta Sitaram Naik and Ors. v. Mr. Tarlok Singh Lungani and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Tulshiram Sitaram Mahajan and Ors. Vs Sharad Shankar Mangde and Ors.

D. Prabhu @ Desmond D'Costa Prabhu Vs Gateway Properties Pvt. Ltd. and Ors.

Shri. Avinash Gothi Vs Niyazzoddin Paroddin Pathan and Anr.

Shri. Prasad Vinayak Vaidya Vs M/S. Laurent and Benon Management Consultants Ltd.

Prakash Laxman Chanderkar Vs Anupam Shrivastava, Chief Manager

Shri. Balkrishna Harishchandra Pimple and Anr. Vs Shri. Pramod Harishchandra Pimple and Ors.