SATISH KUMAR Vs. NAGAR PALIKA PARISHAD LAKSAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of present first appeal, the appellants/plaintiffs seek to set-aside the judgment and decree dtd. 29/5/2010 passed by IInd Additional Civil Judge (S.D.) Haridwar in O.S. No.117 of 2007 'Satish Kumar and Ors. vs. Nagar Panchayat', whereby the court concerned dismissed the suit of the appellants/plaintiffs under Order 7 Rule 11(d) of CPC.

(2.) Factual matrix of the case is that the appellants/plaintiffs had filed a suit for a decree of declaration and permanent injunction against the respondents/defendants thereby praying to declare the appellants/plaintiffs to be the absolute owner of the suit property comprised in khasra no.36, 37 and 44 situated at Village Simli Pargana Manglaur Tehsil Laksar, District Haridwar; that, the respondent no.1/defendant no.1 Nagar Panchayat Laksar filed written statement taking objection therein that the respondent no.1/defendant no.1 has initiated proceedings against the appellants/plaintiffs under Sec. 4/7 of The Uttar Pradesh Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1972 (in short, the Act) in respect of land comprising Khasra No.44, as stated above; that, the trial court, vide impugned order dtd. 29/5/2010, allowed the application of the appellants/plaintiffs under Order 7 Rule 11(d) of CPC and dismissed the suit of the appellants/plaintiffs, hence, this first appeal.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellants/plaintiffs would submit that Order 7 Rule 11(d) of CPC talks about rejection of plaint where on the basis of averments made in the plaint the suit appears to be barred by any law, however, the trial court, vide the impugned order, has rejected the plaint of the appellants/plaintiffs for the reason that the suit property was also under adjudication in Public Premises Case No.10/2003 initiated by respondent no.1/defendant no.1 Nagar Panchayat.