RANJANA BAMMI Vs. SURESH KUMAR MALHOTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this revision petition, the petitioners have challenged the legality of order dated 3. 2. 2006 whereby the learned ADJ dismissed an application made by the respondents under Order 2 Rule 2 (2) CPC in the following manner:

(2.) IT is submitted by the petitioners that the plaintiff filed the instant suit before the Trial Court for recovery of Rs. 5 lac against the petitioners and other respondents. The plaintiff in December 2002 had earlier also filed a suit under Order 37for recovery of Rs. 6 lac on the same cause of action. The earlier suit was filed before the High Court alleging that cause of action arose in favour of the plaintiff on 25. 9. 1999 when an agreement for payment of brokerage was executed and on subsequent dates when a sum of Rs. 2 lac was paid in piecemeal. In the latter suit also the plaintiff had taken the same plea that cause of action arose on 25. 9. 1999 in favour of the plaintiff, when the agreement for payment of brokerage was executed. It is submitted that the subsequent suit for claiming additional amount was barred under Order 2 Rule 2 cpc however, the learned Trial Court without considering the facts and the merits dismissed the application.

(3.) IT is apparent from the order of the Trial Court that the Trial court had dismissed the application under Order 2 Rule 2 (2) CPC in a casual and cursory manner without looking into the facts of the case. It is obvious that it is a case of failure on the part of the Trial Court to exercise its jurisdiction. When Trial Court dismisses an application stating that there were no merits in the application, the Trial Court is supposed to discuss the merits. The Trial Court cannot dismiss an application saying that it has no merits without disclosing why it has no merits. The revision petition is allowed. The matter is remanded back to the Trial Court for disposal of application under order 2 Rule 2 (2) CPC on merits. A copy of this order be sent to the Trial Court.