Pleadings-based scrutiny under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC cannot reject a plaint on disputed benami and exception issues

At the stage of Order 7 Rule 11 CPC, a plaint can be rejected only on the basis of its own averments and not on disputed questions requiring evidence. Whether a transaction is benami, whether Section 4 of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act bars the suit, and whether any exception under Section 2(9) applies are factual matters that cannot be decided at threshold from the plaint alone. The court must see only whether the bar appears on the face of the pleadings; where proof is needed, the suit must proceed to evidence and merits.

---

---

Issues: Whether the plaint could be rejected under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC on the ground that the suit was barred by Section 4 of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988, and whether the applicability of the statutory exceptions under Section 2(9) required evidence.

Analysis: For an application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC, only the averments in the plaint can be examined. Whether the property transaction is benami, whether it is hit by the prohibition under Section 4, and whether it falls within any exception under Section 2(9) are questions that depend on evidence. These are disputed questions of fact and cannot be decided at the threshold on the basis of the plaint alone.

Conclusion: The plaint could not be rejected under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC, and the challenge to the trial court's refusal to reject the plaint failed.

Final Conclusion: The revision petition was without merit and stood dismissed, leaving the suit to be decided on its own evidence and merits.

Ratio Decidendi: At the stage of Order 7 Rule 11 CPC, a plaint cannot be rejected on a plea that requires proof of disputed facts or determination of statutory exceptions; the court must proceed only on the plaint averments and see whether the suit is barred on their face.

---