MAHEBOOB RASULBHAI GHANCHI Vs. JAGDISHKUMAR GAURISHANKAR JOSHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicants herein - original defendants have preferred the present Civil Revision Application under Sec. 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [ "CPC" for short] challenging the order dtd. 21/12/2014 passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge, Sanand below Exh.18 in Regular Civil Suit No.132 of 2012 whereby the application of the present applicants under Order VII Rule 11 of CPC has been rejected.

(2.) The brief facts giving rise to the present Civil Revision Application are as under:-

(3.) Mr. S.H.Sanjanwala, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the applicants - original defendants submitted that the plaint is liable to be rejected under the provisions of Order VII Rule 11 of CPC once the ingredients of said provision are satisfied and it is the duty of the Court to reject the plaint and dismiss the suit. He has submitted that the plaint is liable to rejected since it does not disclose the cause of action. He has submitted that when the plaint does not disclose the cause of action, the plaint is liable to be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 of CPC without going into any other provisions of the law. He further submits that since in the plaint itself, there is no prayer for specific performance, the bar of Sec. 34 of the Specific Relief Act clearly applies and therefore, the plaint was liable to be rejected. He further submits that the Court has to find out as to whether in the facts of the case, the reliefs claimed in the plaint can be granted to the plaintiff or not, and if the Court finds that the same cannot be granted under the law, then such a suit is not allowed to continue.