https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=440863 The court found that the plaintiffs' claim lacked specificity and support, with no cause of action disclosed. Additionally, the suit was time-barred under the Limitation Act, as it was filed beyond the prescribed period. The property held by Defendant No. 2 was deemed her sole ownership under various acts cited. Consequently, the court allowed the application to reject the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 CPC, leading to the dismissal of the suit and related applications. en-us Thu, 06 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 28 Jul 2023 09:21:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=440863 The court found that the plaintiffs' claim lacked specificity and support, with no cause of action disclosed. Additionally, the suit was time-barred under the Limitation Act, as it was filed beyond the prescribed period. The property held by Defendant No. 2 was deemed her sole ownership under various acts cited. Consequently, the court allowed the application to reject the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 CPC, leading to the dismissal of the suit and related applications. Case-Laws Benami Property Thu, 06 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=440863