Defendants sought rejection of a plaint in an injunction suit, alleging suppression of earlier proceedings. The High Court held that only plaint averments are relevant for rejection; the plea of possession required trial, and dismissed the civil revision petition.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO. 98 OF 2024 (IO)
BETWEEN:
SMT.ASHWATHAMMA, SINCE DEAD, REPRESENTED BY HER LR
Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
2(i) SRI.SRINIVAS, S/O LATE BORAIAH, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, RESIDENT OF HONNAPURA GRAMA, THIPPASANDRA HOBLI, MAGADI TALUK, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT.
…PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. AMITH XAVIER C.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
SRI.T.N.RUDRESH, S/O T.R.NAGARAJ, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/O K.R PURAM, BENGALURU EAST TALUK, BENGALURU DISTRICT - 560 036.
…RESPONDENT
THIS CRP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 115 OF CPC, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 04.11.2023 PASSED ON I.A.NO.2 IN OS.NO.69/2021 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, MAGADI, REJECTING THE I.A.NO.2 FILED UNDER ORDER VII RULE 11(a) AND (d) OF CPC FOR REJECTION OF PLAINT.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The respondent instituted a suit for injunction. In the said suit, the petitioners had preferred an application under Order 7 Rule 11(a) and (d) of CPC requesting the Trial Court to reject the plaint. It was contended by the petitioners that the earlier proceedings were suppressed and therefore, the suit for injunction was not maintainable and the plaint was consequently liable to be rejected.
a plaint, only the plaint averments would be germane and
NC: 2024:KHC:11074 CRP No. 98 of 2024
not the defence of the defendants. The Trial Court has correctly taken into consideration that a plea has been made out by the plaintiff that he is in possession and he is requesting only for protecting this possession and this issue was required to be determined.
reason to entertain the revision.
Sd/JUDGE
RMS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 12
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a plaint in a suit for injunction can be rejected under Order VII Rule 11(a) and (d) CPC on the ground that earlier proceedings were suppressed by the plaintiff.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Smt. Ashwathamma (since dead), represented by her LR Sri. Purushotham and others (petitioners 1-3)
Sri. T.N. Rudresh
N S SANJAY GOWDA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
