Rejection of plaint limits: disputed validity of foundational permission cannot be decided at the threshold under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC.

At the stage of rejection of a plaint under Order 7, Rule 11 CPC, the court must confine itself to the plaint averments and undisputed documents forming part of the plaint, and cannot decide disputed questions about the legality of a foundational permission under Section 38 of the Rajasthan Public Trusts Act. Where the validity of the permission raises mixed questions of law and fact, including notice, hearing, and challengeability, those matters must be raised in the written statement and tried in accordance with law rather than at the threshold. The plaint was therefore not liable to rejection merely because that permission was disputed, and the revision succeeded.

---

---

Issues: Whether, for the purpose of Order 7, Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the Court could go beyond the plaint and examine the validity of the permission granted under Section 38 of the Rajasthan Public Trusts Act, 1959, to decide whether the plaint disclosed a cause of action.

Analysis: The scope of Order 7, Rule 11 is confined to a consideration of the plaint averments, and where relevant, documents forming part of the plaint, on their face value. The question whether the permission granted by the Assistant Commissioner was valid in law raised disputed questions of law and fact, including whether notice or hearing had been given and whether the permission could otherwise be challenged. Such questions could not be decided at the threshold while considering rejection of the plaint. They could, if properly raised, be taken in the written statement and tried as an issue or preliminary issue in accordance with law.

Conclusion: The plaint could not be rejected on the ground that it disclosed no cause of action merely because the validity of the permission under Section 38 was disputed.

Final Conclusion: The revision succeeded, the order rejecting the plaint was set aside, and the application was directed to proceed in accordance with law.

Ratio Decidendi: At the stage of rejection of plaint under Order 7, Rule 11, the Court must confine itself to the plaint and undisputed documents forming part of it, and it cannot adjudicate disputed questions touching the legality or validity of a foundational permission.

---