Case Note & Summary
The appellant, defendant Nos. 1 to 3 in the original suit, challenged the order of the First Appellate Court which had reversed the Trial Court's order rejecting the plaint under Order VII Rule 11(d) CPC. The suit was filed by the respondents (plaintiffs) for declaration of title and permanent injunction in respect of certain immovable property. The Trial Court had rejected the plaint on the ground that the suit was barred by limitation. The First Appellate Court set aside that order, holding that the question of limitation required trial. The High Court, in this miscellaneous second appeal, upheld the First Appellate Court's decision. The court observed that for rejection of plaint under Order VII Rule 11, only the plaint averments are to be considered. The plaint disclosed a cause of action and the suit was not barred by limitation on the face of it. The court held that the question of limitation is a mixed question of law and fact and cannot be decided at the threshold without trial. The appeal was dismissed, and the suit was directed to proceed.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure Code - Order VII Rule 11(d) - Rejection of Plaint - Limitation - The court considered whether a suit for declaration and injunction is barred by limitation when the plaintiff is in possession and the cause of action is continuous. Held that the question of limitation is a mixed question of law and fact and cannot be decided at the threshold without trial. The plaint disclosed a cause of action and the suit was not barred by limitation on the face of it. (Paras 1-10) B) Limitation Act, 1963 - Article 58 - Suit for Declaration - The court held that Article 58 of the Limitation Act applies to suits for declaration, but the period of limitation begins to run when the right to sue first accrues. In the present case, the plaintiff claimed possession and the cause of action was continuous, so the suit was not barred. (Paras 5-8) C) Civil Procedure Code - Order VII Rule 11 - Rejection of Plaint - The court reiterated that for rejection of plaint under Order VII Rule 11, only the plaint averments are to be considered and not the defence. The plaint disclosed a cause of action and the suit was not barred by limitation. (Paras 3-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Trial Court was justified in rejecting the plaint under Order VII Rule 11(d) CPC on the ground of limitation, and whether the First Appellate Court erred in reversing that order.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the miscellaneous second appeal and confirmed the order of the First Appellate Court setting aside the rejection of plaint. The suit is to proceed in accordance with law.
Law Points
- Order VII Rule 11 CPC
- Rejection of Plaint
- Limitation Act
- 1963
- Suit for Declaration and Injunction
- Cause of Action
- Possession
