RAMINDER KAUR Vs. RAJINDER KUMAR PAHWA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RAMINDER Kaur -petitioner/defendant has filed this civil revision petition against Rajinder Kumar Pahwa etc. -respondents/plaintiffs under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the impugned order dated 5.9.2014 (Annexure -P.4) passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Panchkula, whereby the application dated 17.1.2014 (Annexure -P.2) filed by the petitioner/defendant under Order 7 Rule 11 C.P.C. was dismissed with costs. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the record.

(2.) FROM the record, I find that the defendant/petitioner filed an application under Order 7 Rule 11 C.P.C. for rejection of the plaint mainly on the ground that the suit has been filed by the plaintiffs through their general power of attorney holder Vinod Kumar Pahwa against the defendant seeking possession of half portion of the ground floor of S.C.O. No. 410, Sector 8, Panchkula, apart from the recovery of the arrears of rent @ Rs. 35,300/ - per month w.e.f. 1.6.2011 to 31.8.2011 and mesne profit on account of use and occupation charges thereof from the defendant by way of her ejectment.

(3.) FROM the record, I find that firstly, it is settled law that for deciding the application filed under Order 7 Rule 11 C.P.C. only the averments made in the plaint are to be seen and the version of the defendant in the written statement or the documents of the defendant' are not to be seen. It is no where the case of the plaintiffs that they are partners and have constituted a partnership firm. As per the plaint, they have stated that they are co -sharers in the suit property. Therefore, this plea of the defendant regarding unregistered partnership firm etc. cannot be seen at this stage. Otherwise also, this case was fixed for final arguments and both the parties have already concluded their evidence. An application under Order 7 Rule 11 C.P.C. can be filed at any stage, but at the same time, the defendant by filing application under Order 7 Rule 11 C.P.C. cannot take his legal objections, which are in the written statement nor he can rely upon his documents. Otherwise also, prima facie there is nothing to show that the plaintiffs have constituted an unregistered firm.