UMASHANKAR PATERIYA Vs. KANHAIYA LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision having been heard and reserved for orders, coming on for pronouncement this day, the court passed the following:

(2.) The respondents No.1 to 5, as plaintiffs before the trial Court, filed a Civil Suit No.A/3900105/2016 against the defendants (applicants No.1 & 2 and respondents No.6 to 13) seeking relief of declaration of title and declaring the sale-deeds executed by the applicant No.1 in favour of applicant No.2 and respondents No.6 to 11 as null and void as also for grant of permanent injunction.

(3.) During pendency of aforesaid civil suit the applicants (defendants No.1 & 2) filed an application under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure stating that respondents/plaintiffs have paid fixed court fee and not paid ad valorem court fee and, therefore, the suit is liable to be dismissed on account of non-specific of cause of action as also misjoinder of party and barred by law as also limitation as the respondents/plaintiffs have erroneously stated that cause of action arose on 18/2/2016 and that the temple in question is not registered Public Trust under the provision of Sec. 32 of M.P. Public Trust Act. The respondents/plaintiffs had filed their reply to aforesaid application under Order 7 Rule 11 of CPC stating that on the basis of order of Revenue Court dtd. 18/2/2016 the applicant No.1 executed sale deed in favour of defendants No.2 to 9 on 5/3/2016 and suit has been filed as a representative of public at large and accordingly, claimed dismissal of the suit. The trial Court vide impugned order dtd. 14/12/2017 dismissed the application filed by applicants/defendants No.1 & 2. Being aggrieved by the impugned order the applicants have filed instant revision.