Judicial Review Not Negated In Election Matters Where Level Playing Field Is Impaired By Violence: Supreme Court FIR Registration | Prospective Accused Has Locus Standi To Appeal Against Single Judge's Direction: Supreme Court Executing Deed Claiming Disputed Property Not 'False Document' Without Impersonation; Civil Disputes Can't Be Criminalised: Allahabad High Court Section 24 CPC | Partition Suit Can Be Transferred To High Court To Avoid Inconsistent Findings With Pending Testamentary Proceedings: Bombay High Court Upgraded Junior High Schools Lose Separate Legal Identity; Recruitment Under 1978 Rules Not Maintainable For Resulting Vacancies: Allahabad High Court Section 370 IPC | Consent Of Victim Is Irrelevant For Proving Trafficking; High Court Sustains Conviction Despite Acquittal Under Section 370A(2) Section 307 IPC | Absence Of Bodily Injury Does Not Exclude Offence If Intention Or Knowledge Is Established From Surrounding Circumstances: Delhi High Court Income Tax Reopening | Assessing Officer Cannot Initiate Reassessment Based On Third-Party Allegations Without Establishing Direct Nexus With Assessee: Gujarat High Court Section 294 CrPC | Non-Examination Of Autopsy Doctor Not Fatal To Prosecution When Post-Mortem Report's Genuineness Is Undisputed: Karnataka High Court Section 25 Arms Act | Mere Custody Without Awareness Not An Offence, 'Conscious Possession' Essential: Delhi High Court Quashes FIR Over Single Live Cartridge Section 20 Prevention Of Corruption Act | Statutory Presumption Cannot Be Triggered Without Proof Of Demand; Mere Recovery Insufficient: Himachal Pradesh High Court Article 227 Constitution of India | High Court Cannot Sit In Appeal Over Findings Of Tribunal Under Supervisory Jurisdiction: Kerala High Court Mere Registration Of Will Does Not Dispense With Requirement To Prove Execution Under Section 68 Evidence Act: Madras High Court Insurance Policy Exclusion | Onus To Prove Suicide Can Be Discharged By Circumstantial Evidence And Unexplained Discrepancies In Medical Records: NCDRC Registration Act | Contested Decree Declaring Pre-Existing Rights By Adverse Possession Does Not Require Compulsory Registration Or Stamp Duty: Madhya Pradesh High Court Section 100 Patents Act | Government Empowered To Authorise Manufacture Of Patented Life-Saving Drugs For Non-Commercial Distribution To Patients: Kerala High Court Madras High Court Slaps ₹1 Lakh Cost On Centre Over Botched Prisoner Repatriation Contempt Of Court | Bona Fide Efforts To Verify Credentials Preclude Finding Of 'Wilful Disobedience': Telangana High Court Financial Commissioner Cannot Remand Appointment Of Lambardar Without Finding Perversity In Collector’s Order: Punjab & Haryana High Court Article 226 | High Court Cannot Act As Second Appellate Authority Over Transfer Orders; Judicial Review Permissible Only On Four Limited Grounds: Rajasthan High Court Drugs and Cosmetics Act | Prosecution Must Prove Possession And Lack Of Licence Through Independent Evidence; Failure Of Panch Witnesses Is Fatal: Telangana High Court Section 392 IPC | Appellate Courts Can Reduce Sentence To Period Already Undergone Considering Protracted Litigation And Lack Of Criminal Antecedents: Punjab & Haryana High Court

Punjab and Haryana High Court Dismisses Revision Petition Challenging Rejection of Plaint in Suit for Permanent Injunction

07 May 2024 2:49 AM

By: Admin


In a recent judgment, the Punjab and Haryana High Court dismissed a revision petition challenging the rejection of a plaint in a suit for permanent injunction. Justice Alka Sarin, presiding over the bench, delivered the verdict on 4th July 2023, upholding the impugned order dated 2nd February 2023.

The revision petition (CR No. 3352 of 2023) was filed by the defendant-petitioners, seeking the rejection of the plaint filed by the plaintiff-respondents. The plaintiffs had sought a permanent injunction to restrain the defendants from interfering with their peaceful possession of a land measuring 06 acres 07 kanals 03 marlas in Pathankot GT Road, Village Noorpur, Tehsil and District Jalandhar.

The defendant-petitioners contended that the suit was not maintainable as the plaintiffs were not in possession of the said property. Additionally, they argued that the suit relied on an unregistered agreement to sell and that an alternative remedy of filing a suit for specific performance was available to the plaintiffs.

Justice Alka Sarin, in her judgment, stated, “While deciding an application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC, only the averments of the plaint are to be seen.” She highlighted that the plaintiffs had specifically averred their possession and the need for an injunction against dispossession. The judge further noted that the question of possession raised by the defendant-petitioners could not be considered at this stage. She also emphasized that the availability of an alternative remedy and the reliance on an unregistered agreement were matters of evidence, not grounds for rejecting the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 CPC.

Quoting from the judgment, Justice Alka Sarin concluded, “Learned counsel for the petitioners has been unable to convince this Court that there is any ground made out under Order VII Rule 11 CPC for rejection of the plaint.” Accordingly, the revision petition was deemed devoid of merit and dismissed.

This decision by the Punjab and Haryana High Court clarifies the importance of considering only the averments in the plaint while deciding an application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC. The judgment reinforces that grounds for rejection should be established based on the content of the plaint, rather than issues that require evidentiary examination.

The case did not refer to any specific previous judgments or cases in reaching its conclusion.

Date of Decision: 4th July 2023

Satwant Singh (deceased) vs Ranjit Singh and Others            

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/Satwant-Vs-Ranjit-04-July-23-PH-HC.pdf"]                                           -

Latest Legal News