DILIP AND OTHERS Vs. SANJEEVAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Defendants' revision petition assailing the order passed by the II Addl. Civil Judge and JMFC., Belgaum, dismissing the application filed under Order VII Rule 11 (a) of the Civil Procedure Code is called in question.

(2.) I have heard the arguments of Sri Rajshekhar Gunjalli, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. He would vehemently contend that trial Court committed a serious error in rejecting the application filed by the defendants under Order VII Rule 11 (a) of the Civil Procedure Code seeking for rejection of the plaint, inasmuch as, suit in question which has been filed by the plaintiff does not disclose the cause of action and as such, frivolous suit ought not to have been entertained by the trial Court and it ought to have allowed the application filed by the defendants and rejected the plaint.

(3.) Having heard learned counsel for the petitioners, this Court is of the considered view that there is no irregularity or illegality committed by the trial Court for entertaining an application filed by defendants under Order VII Rule 11 (a). Averments made in the plaint alone has to be looked into and no amount of plea putforward by the defendants either in the written statement or in an application filed independently thereof can also be looked into for purposes of considering the prayer for rejection of plaint under Order VII Rule 11 (a). For this proposition, the judgment of the Honourable Apex Court in the case of Mayar (H.K) Ltd. and others Vs. Owners and Parties, Vessel M.V. Fortune Express and others, AIR 2006 SC 1828 : 2006 AIR SCW 863 : [2006(2) ICC (S.C.) 479] can be looked up.