SHANTI DEVI Vs. NITIN CHOCKSEY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order dated 04.02.2013 passed by First Civil Judge Class -2, Shivpuri in case No.14A/ 2012 E.D.

(2.) THE admitted facts between the parties are that a judgment and compromise decree was passed on 30.11.2008, Annexure P -5. Thereafter, the plaintiff/respondent filed a suit for permanent injunction, Annexure P -2. The petitioners preferred an application under Order 7 Rule 11 read with Section 151 of CPC. In this application, the petitioners raised objections regarding valuation of the suit. In addition, it is contended that the judgment and decree dated 30.11.2008 can be executed on its registration but a fresh suit is not maintainable. The Court below has rejected the said application by the impugned order by holding that in a suit for permanent injunction, it was for the plaintiff to value his suit.

(3.) CRITICIZING the aforesaid order, Shri D.D. Bansal, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the Court below is impressed by the caption of the suit and did not deal with the relief clause in the said suit. If relief clause is minutely seen, it will be clear that nature of the suit is different. By relying on (Jamna Devi (Smt.) v. Rajendra Prasad Ji,2013 ILR(MP) 1004), Shri Bansal submits that in any case, the plaintiff needs to value his suit on the basis of each relief. He submits that the Court below has not applied its mind while deciding the application under Order 7 Rule 11 of CPC.