DHAN KUMARI PRADHAN Vs. BIGYAN PRADHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revision petition has been filed by the defendant no.4 impugning an Order dtd. 20/12/2023 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Rongli Sub-Division, Pakyong, Sikkim (the learned Civil Judge) rejecting an application under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) filed by the revisionist (defendant no.4) for rejecting the plaint on two grounds i.e. lack of cause of action and that the suit was barred by limitation. The learned Civil Judge rejected both the issues raised by the defendant no.4 and held that the plaint did disclose a cause of action and that the suit was not barred by limitation.

(2.) Title Suit No.01 of 2023 were filed by respondent nos. 1 to 3 (the plaintiffs) against the Secretary, Land Revenue Department, District Collector, Pakyong, Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Rongli, Pakyong, the defendant no.4 and respondent no.7 (defendant no.5). The suit was styled as a suit for declaration, recovery of possession, cancellation of documents, injunction and other consequential reliefs.

(3.) It was the case of the plaintiffs that they along with defendant no.5 are the legal heirs of late Surjyaman Pradhan @ Suryaman Pradhan (Surjyaman Pradhan) and late Damyanti Pradhan and that the defendant no.4 is the legal heir of late Surjyaman Pradhan and late Padma Kumari Pradhan. According to the plaint late Surjyaman Pradhan had two wives in his lifetime i.e. late Padma Kumari Pradhan and late Damyanti Pradhan and both were sisters and legal/biological daughters of late Rai Sahab Ratna Bahadur Pradhan.