TARVINDRARSINGH MAHENDRASINGH DHILLAN Vs. AMBADAS ASARAM MHASKE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present applicant is the original defendant No.18 in Regular Civil Suit No.22/2023 which is pending in the Court of 5th Joint Civil Judge (Junior Division), Aurangabad i.e. the learned trial Court. The applicant has challenged the order dtd. 18/8/2023 passed by the learned trial Court below Exh.20 in the aforesaid civil suit whereby the learned trial Court has rejected the application filed by present applicant under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short, "C.P.C.") for rejection of plaint.

(2.) The background facts are as under : Present respondent Nos.1 to 6 are the original plaintiffs in R.C.S. No. 22/2023 and they have filed the said suit for partition, separate possession, declaration and injunction. The plaintiffs have claimed relief of partition in respect of the suit property i.e. land Gut No. 145 admeasuring 2 H 61 R situated at village Mitmita, Taluka and District Aurangabad amongst themselves only and not against any of the defendants. Further, they have claimed relief of declaration in respect of in all 22 sale deeds of the suit land being sham and illegal documents and not binding upon them. According to them, the four sale deeds dtd. 3/8/1990 out of aforesaid sale deeds executed by late Asaram Mhaske in favour of defendant Nos.1 to 17 were without consideration and without transfer of actual possession. The plaintiffs have claimed that defendant Nos.1 to 17 had got executed the aforesaid four sale deeds by misrepresenting and by playing fraud with their predecessor in title Asaram Shamrao Mhaske. They claimed that they are still in possession of the suit property. The plaintiffs have also challenged the subsequent transfers of the suit land under remaining sale deeds after execution of the aforesaid four sale deeds of 1990.

(3.) The present applicant i.e. defendant No.18 filed application (Exh.20) under Order VII Rule 11 of C.P.C. for rejection of plaint alleging that suit of the plaintiffs is without any cause of action and since the plaintiffs have sought declaration in respect of four sale deeds executed by Asaram Mhaske in the year 1990 being illegal and not binding upon them in the year 2023 i.e. after 33 years, the suit is clearly barred by Limitation Act.