(1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned counsel for the respondents.
(2.) THE appellants were the plaintiffs before the Trial Court. The suit was one for permanent injunction restraining the defendants, including the Bengaluru Development Authority, from interfering with the alleged possession of the plaintiffs.
(3.) THE appeal was preferred on the footing that the court below having rejected the plaint in terms of Order VII Rule 11(d) of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, could not have placed reliance on the pleadings in the written statement and if at all the plaint could have been rejected on the basis of the averments in the plaint. As the court has proceeded to do so, procedurally this was not in order and on that ground alone, the appeal would have to be allowed.