the suit property, that was challenged by filing an application under Order 7 Rule 11 read with Section 151 of CPC to reject the plaint. The trial court allowing the I.A.No.38/2018 filed under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC and rejecting the plaint on the ground that no cause of action has been disclosed held that no cause of action has been made out by the plaintiff/1st respondent. Aggrieved thereby, an appeal has been filed by the plaintiff in A.S.No.29/2016 under Section 96 of CPC read with Order 41 Rule 1 of CPC on the file of the learned Principal District Judge, Namakkal. The learned Appellate Court after perusing the entire records, without going into the question whether the statements of the defendants were true or the statement of the plaintiff was true, holding that the veracity of all the statements of both parties shall be determined only during the trial, allowed the appeal, thereby setting aside the decree and judgment of the learned Subordinate Judge, Rasipuram, passed in I.A.No.38/2015 in O.S.No.22/2014 dated 09.03.2016. Aggrieved thereby, the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed, instead of filing Second Appeal under Section 100 of CPC.
