SUBRAMANI Vs. SUMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties.

(2.) In this revision petition, defendant No.3 had challenged the order of rejection of application filed under Order VII Rule 11(a), (b) and (d) of CPC.

(3.) The main contention of defendant No.3 in the application filed under Order VII Rule 11(a), (b) and (c) of CPC is that the plaintiffs have filed the suit for the relief of possession and declaration that the sale deed dtd. 24/2/2004 executed by defendant Nos.1 and 2 in his favour is not binding on them and the suit is barred by limitation and the suit is undervalued and proper Court fee has not been paid. It is the contention of defendant No.3 that the sale deed was execute on 24/2/2004 and the plaintiffs being the daughters, not entitled for a share under Sec. 6(1) of the Hindu Succession Act as the sale deed has been executed prior to 20/12/2004 and also claimed that there is no cause of action for the suit. Hence, prayed the Court to allow the application and reject the plaint.