The High Court of Chhattisgarh dismissed a civil revision petition preferring against the dismissal of an interim application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC. The bench held that the applicants failed to demonstrate a lawful cause for admission, as their application did not specify grounds for rejection under the rule.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
CR No. 96 of 2015
---- Applicants
Versus
---- Respondents
For Petitioners : Mr. Ram Kumar Tiwari, Adv. For Respondent No. 1 : Mr. Sanjay Patel, Adv. For Respondent No. 2 : Mr. Aditya Sharma, PL For other respondent : Not served.
Order On Board
05/01/2016
2
the C.P.C. and the grounds raised in the said application may be decided after evidence on its own merit.
Sd/-
Chandra Bhushan Bajpai Judge
Pathak
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the trial court committed any illegality in rejecting the interim application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC filed by the defendants.
Whether the defendants failed to demonstrate any lawful cause to entertain the application for rejection of plaint.
Whether the civil revision should be allowed and the impugned order quashed.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Reshamlal S/o Bundram Satnami
Rajkumar S/o Bundram Satnami
Phool Bai W/o Kuber Satnami
Phooleshwari W/o Bhuneshwar Satnami
Lakeshari D/o Dholbahra
State Of Chhattisgarh
Chandra Bhushan Bajpai
Pathak
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
