MACT | A Minor Cannot Be Treated as a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consensual Love Affair Not Cheating Under IPC Section 417: Madras High Court Acquits Man Despite Paternity Confirmation Review Jurisdiction is an Ant-Hole in a Pigeon-Hol: Madras High Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Order Upholding Arbitral Award on Liquidated Damages Bank Can Freeze Guarantor’s Salary Account to Recover Loan Dues: Kerala High Court Clarifies CPC Exemption Does Not Apply to Banker’s Right Revenue Entry Calling Property ‘Ancestral’ Does Not Create Title: Gujarat High Court Upholds Registered Will in Second Appeal Licensee Cannot Resist Resumption Of Railway Land: Gauhati High Court Upholds Eviction For Amrit Bharat Station Scheme Mere Non-Payment of Business Dues Is Not Cheating: Calcutta High Court Protects Traders from Criminal Prosecution in Purely Civil Dispute Prosecution’s Failure to Prove Age of Prosecutrix Beyond Reasonable Doubt Fatal to POCSO Conviction: Rajasthan High Court No Title, No Right, No Equity: Bombay High Court Demolishes Claim Over Footpath Stall, Imposes ₹5 Lakh Costs for Abuse of Process Section 155(2) Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Complainant From Seeking Magistrate’s Permission: Allahabad High Court Clarifies Law on Non-Cognizable Investigations Un-Retracted Section 108 Statement Is Binding: Delhi High Court Declines to Reopen ₹3.5 Crore Cigarette Smuggling Valuation Section 34 Is Not an Appeal in Disguise: Delhi High Court Upholds 484-Day Extension in IRCON–Afcons Tunnel Arbitration Section 432(2) Cannot Be Rendered Fatuous: Calcutta High Court Reasserts Balance Between Judicial Opinion and Executive Discretion in Remission Matters Termination of Mandate Is Not Termination of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Revives Reference and Appoints Substitute Arbitrator CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints

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

07 May 2024 8:19 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