DALWINDER SINGH Vs. HARBHAJAN KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioners praying for setting aside order dtd. 9/3/2021 passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Jalandhar, whereby the application filed by the petitioners was dismissed; along with certain other prayers.

(2.) The facts of the case are that the respondents filed a suit seeking permanent injunction against the present petitioners, claiming that the respondents-plaintiffs were co-sharer in the suit property and were in possession of the same. The petitioners-defendants were trying to disturb their possession. The petitioners-defendants were wrongly claiming family partition. The same was never acted upon by the parties. The suit of the respondents was contested by the petitioners-defendants claiming that the defendants were in exclusive possession. However, before the trial court the petitioners-defendants preferred an application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC for rejection of the plaint on the ground that there is no cause of action with the respondents-plaintiffs to file the suit. The said application has been dismissed by the trial court. Hence the present petition has been filed.

(3.) Arguing the case, learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that since the respondents-plaintiffs themselves have admitted in the plaint that they were ousted from the possession of the property, therefore, there is no cause of action available to the plaintiffs. It is further submitted that mere averment in the plaint that the plaintiffs have re-entered into the possession of the said property, without mentioning any specific date, is not a valid ground for filing a suit.