KABBALEGOWDA Vs. D. KRISHNEGOWDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners are before this Court, in this revision petition filed under Section 115 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as 'CPC' for short) assailing the order dated 03.10.2018 passed on I.A. in O.S.No.190/1998, by which application filed under Order VII Rule 11 (a), (b) and (d) of CPC is rejected.

(2.) The petitioners and respondents 2 and 3 are defendants and respondent No.1 is plaintiff in O.S.No.190/1998 filed for the following reliefs:

(3.) The defendants-petitioners filed their written statement and the suit is at the stage of cross-examination of P.W.1. Subsequent to filing of written statement, the legal representatives of defendant No.1 filed application under Order VII Rule 11(a) (b) and (d) praying to reject the plaint on the ground that it would not disclose the cause of action and the suit is badly barred by limitation. In the affidavit accompanying the application, the legal representatives of defendant No.1 have stated that there is no cause of action to file the suit as the plaintiff is stranger to the family and taking advantage of the common name of Durgegowda who is the father of the defendants, the plaintiff has misrepresented by playing fraud. Further, it is stated that without placing any material or document, the plaintiff is claiming hereditary pooja right in Kabbalamma temple. Further, it is stated that the plaintiff has filed a suit for partition in O.S.No.177/1982 and the same was dismissed on 02.04.1986, without there being any explanation for the delay of 16 years, from the date of dismissal of the suit till filing of the present suit. Further it is also stated that the court fee paid is not proper.