LAWS(P&H)-2012-8-163

CHHATAR PAL SINGH Vs. DEEPAK AGGARWAL AND OTHERS

Decided On August 28, 2012
Chhatar Pal Singh Appellant
V/S
Deepak Aggarwal And Others Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petition is against dismissal of the petition for rejection of the plaint. The suit had been filed for an injunction by the purchaser who had agreed to purchase: the property from the defendant who is the revision petitioner. According to the defendant the amount which the purchaser had undertaken to pay as per the terms of the agreement had not been paid and therefore the suit for rejection without claiming a relief for specific performance was itself not maintainable. In other words, he was contending that the suit for specific performance was the only efficacious remedy available and injunction which he had sought was not capable of being granted in terms of Section 41 of the Specific Relief Act. The said Section contemplates ten circumstances under which an injunction could be refused. One of the circumstances is that there is an alternative efficacious remedy. Whether the injunction should be granted will be a matter for consideration in the suit and if there is an interim prayer for such injunction it could also be considered in the light of the provisions of Section 38 of Specific Relief Act relating to grant of interim relief. The test for rejection of a plaint under Order VII Rule 11 is to assume of the averments in the plaint to be correct and to see whether the suit has valid cause of action and whether it is within time. The grounds under Order VII Rule 11 themselves give a clue as to when a plaint could be rejected. If a person who sues on an apprehension that the defendant was attempting to transfer the property to some other person in breach of agreement, it constitutes a valid cause of action. It is open for a defendant to contend such a cause of action was not properly established. It is mixed question of fact and law and the plaint can not be thrown out after threshold by entertaining a petition under Order VII Rule 11 CPC. The petition was correctly dismissed and I find no reason to interfere. The revision petition is dismissed.