Dismissed

Kamna Bhargava W/O Shri Raghuraj Bhargava v. Somna Dheer W/O Late Dr. Gulbir Singh Rekhi, D/O Late Shri Ved Pal Krishna Dheer

Rajasthan HC15 Feb 2024CR/47/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court dismissed a civil revision challenging the rejection of a plaint in a partition suit. The court held that the cause of action was disclosed and the suit was not barred by law, reversing the trial court's dismissal of the rejection application. It directed immediate disposal of the suit.

What did the court decide?

The civil revision petition was dismissed. The trial court was directed to dispose of the underlying partition suit as expeditiously as possible.

Kamna Bhargava W/O Shri Raghuraj Bhargava Vs Somna Dheer W/O… — Partition | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JP:8855]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Revision Petition No. 47/2023

¶4

Kamna Bhargava W/o Shri Raghuraj Bhargava, Aged About 55 Years, R/o Park C-5 H.no. 12, Second Floor, Basant Kunj, New Basant Kunj, Sector-C-Delhi-110 070.

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

Somna Dheer W/o Late Dr. Gulbir Singh Rekhi, D/o Late Shri Ved Pal Krishna Dheer, Aged About 55 Years, R/o 250/44, Pratap Enclave, Sector-25, Pratapnagar, Jaipur.

¶8

Smt Archana Chawla W/o Shr Rakesh Chawla D/o Late Shri Ved Pal Krishna Dheer, Aged About 62 Years, R/o 143, Ummed Heritage, Near Ummed Palace Hotel, Jodhpur.

¶9

Shri Sandeep Dheer S/o Late Shri Ved Pal Krishna Dheer, Aged About 61 Years, R/o B-307, Malviya Nagar, Jaipur302017.

¶10

Dr. Arun Dheer Late Shri Ved Pal Krishna Dheer, Aged About 59 Years, R/o B-307, Malviya Nagar, Jaipur302017.

¶11

Smt. Romita Dheer W/o Late Chandra Shekhar, Aged About 47 Years, R/o H.no. 207 And 208 Double Story, New Rajendra Nagar, N.r.w, Delhi-110 060

¶12

----Respondents

¶13

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Neeraj Batra For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rinesh Kumar Gupta with Mr. Anoop Meena Mr. Gaurav Sharma

¶14

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN

¶15

Order

¶16

15/02/2024

¶17

Instant revision petition is preferred aggrieved from order dated 02.02.2023 in civil suit No. 24/2022 passed by learned

[2024:RJ-JP:8855]

[CR-47/2023]

(2 of 4)

Additional District Judge No.5 Ajmer whereby application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC filed by petitioner was dismissed.

¶22

Learned counsel for petitioner has submitted that a suit for partition was filed by plaintiff for parition of the property of Late Sh. Ved Pal Krishna Dheer. He also submitted that the suit property is self acquired property of Late Sh. Ved Pal Krishna Dheer and during his lifetime he had executed a Will in favour of petitioner and others, which was acted upon and on the basis of aforesaid Will certain entries have already been changed therefore the plaintiff has no right to file the suit for partition. He also submitted that in case, if the petition is not allowed then the trial court may be directed to dispose of the suit within a time bound manner.

¶23

Aforesaid contentions were opposed by learned counsel for plaintiff on the ground that the trial court has rightly dismissed the application as alleged Will was a doubtful document, therefore same does not inspire confidence. He also submitted that while considering application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC only averment made in the plaint are required to be considered.

¶24

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 5. Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Dahibhen Vs. Arvindbhai Kalyanji Bhanusali through LRs and Ors. 2020 SCC Online (SC)

¶25

562 while dealing with an appeal against an order allowing rejection of a suit at the threshold, had occasion to consider various precedents to discuss the intent under Order VII Rule 11 of CPC. Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that if no cause of action is disclosed in the plaint, or if the suit is barred by limitation, court would not permit protraction of the

¶26

(3 of 4) [CR-47/2023]

¶27

[2024:RJ-JP:8855]

¶28

proceedings and it would be necessary to put an end to the shame litigation so that further judicial time is not wasted.

¶29

After placing reliance upon Azhar Hussain Vs. Rajiv Gandhi 1986 SCC (SUPP) 315 opined that the entire purpose of conferment of such power is to ensure that a litigation, which is meaningless and bond to prove abortive should not be permitted to occupy the time and space of the Courts. The power on the Court to terminate a civil action is, however, a drastic one, and the conditions enumerated in Order VII, Rule 11 are required to be strictly adhered to.

¶30

Hon’ble Supreme Court while dealing with such an application seeking rejection of a plaint clarified that while determining any application filed under Order VII Rule 11 the court should restrict itself to the plaint and should not go into the detail facts as provided under the written statement or even in the application filed for rejection of plaint. While scrutinizing the averments in the plaint, the Court can read documents annexed and relied upon in the plaint.

¶31

Order VII Rule 11(d) of CPC provides that a plaint should be rejected if the suit is barred by any law. Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Ramisetty Venkatanna Vs. Nasyam Jamal Saheb 2023 INSC 458 has observed that plaint should be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 (a)(d) of CPC if it is vexatious, illusory cause of action and barred by law.

¶32

A perusal of plaint indicated that a suit for partition was filed by one of the Class-I Heir of Late Sh. Ved Pal Krishna Dheer claiming 1/6th share in the property left by Late Sh. Ved Pal Krishna Dheer. A specific averment is also made in the plaint that Late Sh. Ved Pal Krishna Dheer was suffering from Dementia/Alzheimer and was not medically fit to take any decision. A specific allegation is

[2024:RJ-JP:8855]

[CR-47/2023]

(4 of 4)

also made on present petitioner about fabrication and forgery of certain documents. In the plaint itself nowhere it was disclosed that any Will was executed by Late Sh. Ved Pal Krishna Dheer during his lifetime. The petitioner herein has claimed to be one of the to be a beneficiary of the Will, executed by Late Sh. Ved Pal Krishna Dheer.

¶37

We have gone through the documents submitted by the defendant No.1 and all these documents are submitted in support of defence raised by the petitioner defendant No.1. The petitioner has claimed right on the basis of Will executed by Late Sh. Ved Pal Krishna Dheer before his death on 05.10.2017. An application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC was filed only on the basis of defence as raised by petitioner defendant No.1 but the application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC is required to be adjudicated on the basis of averment in plaint and also on the basis of documents submitted in support of the plaint.

¶38

Herein considering the scope of civil suit filed by respondent No.1 we are of considered view that the proper cause of action was disclosed in the civil suit and suit is also not barred by any law therefore the application was rightly dismissed by the trial court hence the petition is liable to be dismissed.

¶39

As a result, petition is dismissed but trial court is hereby directed to dispose of the suit as expeditiously as possible. 13. Misc. application, if any, stands disposed of.

¶40

(ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J

¶41

PREETI VALECHA /41

Kamna Bhargava W/O Shri Raghuraj Bhargava v. Somna Dheer W/O Late Dr. Gulbir Singh Rekhi, D/O Late Shri Ved Pal Krishna Dheer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kamna Bhargava W/O Shri Raghuraj Bhargava v. Somna Dheer W/O Late Dr. Gulbir Singh Rekhi, D/O Late Shri Ved Pal Krishna Dheer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ram Charan and Others Vs Moti Lal and Others

Gopal Lal Choudhary S/O Manaram, Vs Smt. Asgari Begum W/O Late Fajaluddin

Raja Fateh Singh S/O Late Raj Puran Singh Vs Hanuman Sahai S/O Not Known

Rajkumar S/O Champa Lal Vs Rajkumar Hardayal Singh Trailokya Rajya Laxmi Devi Charitable Trust

Shri Hussan Mohammed Son of Shri Ghasi Khan Vs Shri Ashrif Ali Son of Shri Alam Ali

Smt. Rajrani W/O Sh. Bhupendra Singh, Vs Shri Ajit Singh, S/O Sh. Onad Singh