PRIYANKA SRIVASTAVA Vs. BIPIN BIHARI LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

(2.) This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner for setting aside the order dated 13.02.2018 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Rohtas in Guardianship Case No.01 of 2014 whereby he has rejected the petition dated 07.10.2015 filed under Order 7 Rule 11 and Section 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short 'CPC').

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the order impugned is perverse. The court below failed to appreciate that the guardianship case filed by the respondent was barred under Section 11 of the CPC. Having regard to Section 11 of the CPC, the court below ought to have rejected the plaint at the threshold, as the matter had already been decided in a proceeding by the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court. He has contended that the respondent ought not to have been allowed to re-agitate the matter again and again by abusing the process of law.