In S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.2724/2010, Justice Dalip Singh dismissed the petition holding that the trial court had no jurisdictional error, as Order 7 Rule 11 CPC requires examining only the plaint averments without taking evidence.
The writ petition stands dismissed.
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 JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR
ORDER
S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.2724/2010. Ismat Ali. VERSUS
Mutahada Anjuman Rubatain Harmain Sharifan Varosa Vakifa Begmat, Tonk and Others.
09.03.2010.
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE DALIP SINGH
Mr.M.S.Beg, for the petitioner.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the impugned order dated 01.10.2009 by which the learned trial court prima facie came to the conclusion that the objections which have been raised can only be decided after taking evidence in the matter.
I find no jurisdictional error having been committed by the learned trial court in view of the provisions of Order 7 Rule 11 C.P.C. as under the provisions of Order 7 Rule 11 C.P.C. only the plaint averments are required to be seen.
Consequently, the writ petition stands dismissed.
(DALIP SINGH),J.
Solanki DS, Jr.P.A.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the learned trial court committed a jurisdictional error in not deciding objections without taking evidence under Order 7 Rule 11 C.P.C.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Ismat Ali
Mutahada Anjuman Rubatain Harmain Sharifan Varosa Vakifa Begmat, Tonk
Dalip Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
