Dismissed

Mahendra Kumar S/O Jawahar Mal v. Narayan Lal S/O Nathuram

Rajasthan HC17 Aug 2022CR/115/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Rajasthan dismissed a civil revision petition filed under Section 115 CPC. The revisionist challenged an order dismissing a second application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC in a suit for permanent injunction. The court held there was no jurisdictional error or material illegality in the trial court's order.

What did the court decide?

Revision petition dismissed; no order as to costs.

Mahendra Kumar S/O Jawahar Mal Vs Narayan… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Rajasthan HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Revision Petition No. 115/2022

¶3

Mahendra Kumar S/o Jawahar Mal, Aged About 65 Years, R/o Near Ghoomchakkar, Udaipurawati, Ditrict Jhunjhunu.

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

Narayan Lal S/o Nathuram, Presently R/o Near Ghoomchakkar, Udaipurawati, Ditrict Jhunjhunu.

¶7

Pankaj S/o Mahendra Kumar, R/o Near Ghoomchakkar, Udaipurawati, Ditrict Jhunjhunu.

¶8

Anoop S/o Mahendra Kumar, R/o Near Ghoomchakkar, Udaipurawati, Ditrict Jhunjhunu.

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Intjar Ali For Respondent(s) :

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL

¶12

Order

¶13

17/08/2022

¶14

Petitioner-defendant has preferred this revision petition under Section 115 of Code of Civil Procedure, assailing the order dated 28.4.2022, passed by Civil Judge, Udaipurwati, District Jhunjhunu in suit No.23/2022, to the extent of dismissing his application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC.

¶15

Counsel for petitioner submits that respondent-plaintiff has instituted the civil suit for permanent injunction in relation to two shops in question, which are situated on the agricultural land of Khasra No.1655 measuring 0.1 hectare, therefore, the Civil Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the present civil suit. He also submits that plaintiff has no right to sue defendants as shops in

¶16

(2 of 3)

¶17

[CR-115/2022]

¶18

question were never purchased from the father of defendant.

¶19

Counsel for petitioner also submits that as per market value of shops in question, suit has not properly valued and the Court fee paid is insufficient, therefore, the suit is liable to be rejected under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC.

¶20

Heard counsel for petitioner and perused the impugned order as also pleading of plaint.

¶21

On perusal of plaint, it appears that plaintiff has filed a suit for permanent injunction in relation to shops in question situated in town Udaipurwati, District Jhunjhunu. Plaintiff has averred that he is having ownership and possession of both shops in question and defendants be restrained not to dispossess him and nor to cause any damages in shops in question. Plaintiff discloses a cause of action as well as valuation has been made for the relief of permanent injunction. From the plaint, it nowhere reflects that it is not triable by the Civil Court.

¶22

It is settled proposition of law that at the stage of deciding the application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC, pleadings of plaint are germane and relevant to be taken into consideration. The defense of defendants taken in the written statement are to be irrelevant at this stage. As far as objections raised by petitioner are concerned, some objections have been taken by him in the written statement. The trial Court has observed in the impugned order that all these objections are mixed question of fact and law which can be decided after framing issues and recording of evidence of both parties.

¶23

This court does not find any material illegality, irregularity or jurisdictional error in the impugned order so as to call for

¶24

(3 of 3)

¶25

[CR-115/2022]

¶26

interference by this Court while exercising jurisdiction under

¶27

Section 115 of CPC.

¶28

Accordingly, the revision petition is dismissed.

¶29

There is no order as to costs.

¶30

(SUDESH BANSAL),J

¶31

NITIN /17

Mahendra Kumar S/O Jawahar Mal v. Narayan Lal S/O Nathuram

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahendra Kumar S/O Jawahar Mal v. Narayan Lal S/O Nathuram

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mahaveer S/O Gaind Bihari Vs Omprakash S/O Late Shri Mukut Bihari Sharma

Yusuf Vs Gaulam Kadir and Another

Prabhati Lal Vs Smt Surji and Ors.

Mool Chand Sharma Vs Babu Lal Sharma

Smt. Deepika Saxena W/O Amit Saxena D/O Chandramohan Saxena Vs Amit Saxena S/O Shri V.K. Saxena

Bhagwati Prasad S/O Shri Hajarilal Vs Senior Assistant Engineer