Please Log in / Register to access the full text of this judgment and the entire database
(2021) Law Today Live Doc. Id. 16136 = 2021(2) L.A.R. 338
Decided on: 08.04.2021
Present:
Mr. A.K. Kansal, Advocate for the petitioners.
A. Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (V of 1908), Order 7 Rule 11 – Constitution of India, Article 227 -- Rejection of plaint -- Objection to proper court fee – Dismissal of application – Appeal/Revision against – Maintainability of -- No further appeal or revision at the hands of the defendants is maintainable.
(Para 1, 2, 4)
B. Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (V of 1908), Order 7 Rule 1(i), 11 – Objection to drafting of plaint -- Rejection of plaint – Objection that plaint not drafted in accordance with Order 7 Rule 1 (i) – Held, matter can be examined by the court while finally adjudicating the suit.
(Para 3, 4)
Cases referred:
1. Sri Rathnavaramaraja vs. Smt. Vimla' AIR 1961 SC 1299.
***
ANIL KSHETARPAL, J. (ORAL) –
1. The defendants have filed this revision petition against an interlocutory order passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Panchkula, dismissing an application for rejection of the plaint under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC.
2. The first objection of the defendants is that the plaintiff has not affixed proper court fee. Learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, Panchkula, has found that the proper court fee has been affixed. Still further, no further appeal or revision at the hands of the defendants is maintainable in view of the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in 'Sri Rathnavaramaraja vs. Smt. Vimla' AIR 1961 SC 1299.
3. Next argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the plaint is not drafted in accordance with Order 7 Rule 1 (i).
4. In the considered view of this Court, this matter can be examined by the court while finally adjudicating the suit. Hence, no ground to exercise jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is made out.
5. Dismissed.
Petition dismissed.
********