TASHI DOMA DORJEE Vs. PATHING GUMPA MANAGING COMMITTEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The matter is taken up before issuance of notice. Heard Mr. T. B. Thapa, learned Senior Counsel for the defendant nos. 1 and 2 (the revisionists). The revisionists are aggrieved by rejection of an application under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (the CPC).

(2.) The suit was instituted by Pathing Gumpa Managing Committee as the plaintiff (respondent no.1) against the revisionists as well as the Sub Divisional Magistrate and the District Registrar as defendant nos. 3 and 4 (the respondent nos. 2 and 3). The application for rejection of the plaint was on two primary grounds. The first ground was that the plaint does not disclose any cause of action and the second ground was that it is barred by law of limitation.

(3.) During the course of the extensive arguments made by the learned Senior Counsel for the revisionists it is submitted that clever drafting has given the plaint an illusion of a cause of action. However, on close scrutiny it is a vexatious and mischievous suit without any cause of action.