NANDITA ACHARJEE Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present appeal is directed against the order dated 14.10.2004 passed by the learned Civil Judge, (Sr. Divn), Nagaon in Money Suit No.26/2004 whereby the learned court has rejected the plaints so filed by the appellant.

(2.) THE appellant plaintiff filed a suit for damage and compensation against the respondents in the tune of Rs.50 Crores raising certain allegations against the respondents who have indulged into various antisocial activities, illegal extortion by use of manpower and muscle power against the appellant in series of acts as has been narrated in the plaint. In news item published in the Assam Tribune on 4.2.2003 has also been challenged. The appellant also filed a petition under Section 80(2) of the CPC seeking leave of the court to file the suit. The court however, without passing any order for leave, registered the case and issued summon to the respondents. In response to the summon issued, the defendant Nos.1 to 5 and 7 and 8 filed written statement and other defendants took time for filing written statement. Defendant No.6 however, did not contest the case. During the proceeding, defendant No.7 filed various petitions before the court under Order 7 Rule 11(d) and Rule 11 (e) of CPC for rejection of the plaint to which the appellant filed written objection.

(3.) THE bone of contention of the defendants/respondents raised in those petitions is that the suit instituted by the plaintiff without service of notice under Section 80 CPC is bad in law. Further contention was that the plaint is not accompanied by verification and affidavit as required under Section 26 with Order VI Rule 15 CPC. It is also alleged that the case was filed after one year publishing of news item in the Assam Tribune, so, the case is barred by Section 75 of the Limitation Act. Non -compliance of provisions of Order 4 Rule 1 for not presenting plaint in duplicate is also assailed and on the above mentioned grounds, it was prayed to reject the plaint.