SAKINA BEE Vs. VENKAT SWAMY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The civil revision petition is directed against the order dated 12th September 2006 passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Gadwal, in I.A. No. 1133 of 2005 in O.S.No.41 of 2005.

(2.) The revision petitioners are the petitioners therein and defendants in the suit. The respondents herein are the respondents in I.A.No. 1133 of 2005 and the plaintiffs in O.S. No. 41 of 2005. The respondents filed the suit for declaration that they are absolute owners of the suit schedule properties and for delivery of physical possession of the suit properties to the plaintiffs and for costs of the suit. I.A. No. 1133 of 2005 was filed requesting the court to reject the plaint. That was resisted by filing a counter by the plaintiffs and eventually under the impugned order the application came to be dismissed.

(3.) The grounds set forth inter alia in the affidavit filed in support of I.A. No. 1133 of 2005 are firstly that the plaint does not disclose any cause of action; and secondly, the plaintiffs ought to have filed a counter-claim in the suit O.S. No. 16 of 2005 filed by the defendants against the plaintiffs, instead, filed the present suit and therefore it was barred under Order VIII Rule 6-A (4) of C.P.C.