The High Court of Chhattisgarh dismissed a revision maintained against the rejection of an application under Order 7 Rule 11 and Section 151 CPC. The court held that no error warranted interference as the plaint disclosed a cause of action regarding disturbance of possession.
Revision dismissed in limine and trial directed to be expedited.
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.
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Civil Revision No.17 of 2022
Smt. Kanchan Kunwar D/o Kaushal Singh Aged About 52 Years R/o Village Patpara, Post Chaitma, At Present Vivekanand Nagar, Mopka Tahsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. ---- Applicant
Versus
For Applicant: Ms. Swati Verma, Advocate. For Non-Applicants No.1 to 3: Shri Ram Kumari Tiwari, Advocate. For Non-Applicant No.4/State: Smt M. Asha, PL.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Deepak Kumar Tiwari
Order on Board
14.07.2022
gave rise to filing of the said suit.
Sd/-
(Deepak Kumar Tiwari) Judge .
Priya
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the dismissal of an application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC read with Section 151 CPC of the Code of Civil Procedure warranted interference in revisional jurisdiction.
Whether the impugned order rejecting the application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC discloses any error requiring revisional intervention.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Smt. Kanchan Kunwar
Smt. Varsha Upadhyay
Ku. Swamini Upadhyay
Adtiya Upadhyay
State Of Chhattisgarh
Deepak Kumar Tiwari
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
