MANORAMA Vs. SUDHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This civil revision has been filed by the petitioners/defendants no.1 and 2 under Sec. 115 of the C.P.C. assailing the order dtd. 23/3/2023 passed by the 26th Additional District Judge, Indore (M.P.) in RCS No.101/2016 whereby, the application filed by the petitioner/defendant No.1 under Order 7 Rule 11 of the C.P.C. has been rejected.

(2.) In brief, the facts of the case are that the civil suit has been filed by the respondent No.1 for cancellation of the sale deed and permanent injunction of the suit property against the petitioners and defendants No.2 to 4.

(3.) In the aforesaid civil suit, the defendant no.1 and 2/petitioners have also filed their written statement and it is also contended in their written statement that the petitioners have not sought the relief of possession of the property despite the fact that the suit property is in possession of the defendant No.4 and, hence, the suit is liable to be rejected. Thus, a separate application to this effect under Order 7 Rule 11 of the CPC was also filed, citing Sec. 34 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963.