MOHAMMAD TARIQ RESHI Vs. ASHIQ AHMAD RESHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The back drop, in which the application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC for rejection of plaint had been filed, has been quoted in the judgment rendered in MA No.30/2016 titled "Aftab Ahmad Khan Vs. Mohammad Tariq Reshi and anr". It has already been noted that neither petitioner [who figure as defendant No.1, nor the proforma defendant-respondent No.2 herein (appellant in MA No.30/2016)] have filed the written statement before the learned trial court. The endeavor of the petitioner herein had been to sound that in the light of grounds taken in the application filed therein, in which the impugned order passed on 21/12/2015 has followed, plaint requires rejection.

(2.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that in the light of the judgment relied by the petitioner herein before learned trial court, it was incumbent upon learned trial court to reject the plaint. Paras 5, 6 and 7 of the application so filed before the learned trial court in particular have been referred while as para 8 which deals with the valuation and with regard to which observations have been made in paper book (page 14 of the impugned order), has also been referred by him.

(3.) Mr. Makhdoomi, appearing for plaintiff-respondent No.1 herein, has stated that the order passed by the learned trial court is proper and within parameters of law and, as such, revision petition be dismissed.