https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308869 A plaint can be rejected under Order VII Rule 11(d) only if the bar of limitation is apparent on the face of the plaint read as a whole; isolated pleadings cannot be used to defeat otherwise relevant averments. On the stated pleadings, limitation was not conclusively established at the threshold and required full consideration at trial. Reliefs founded on possession and part performance under Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act, together with declaration, injunction and consequential relief, were interconnected, so the plaint could not be rejected partially. The asserted entitlement under Section 53A was a matter for trial, not threshold rejection. en-us Mon, 14 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 29 Jul 2023 08:13:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308869 A plaint can be rejected under Order VII Rule 11(d) only if the bar of limitation is apparent on the face of the plaint read as a whole; isolated pleadings cannot be used to defeat otherwise relevant averments. On the stated pleadings, limitation was not conclusively established at the threshold and required full consideration at trial. Reliefs founded on possession and part performance under Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act, together with declaration, injunction and consequential relief, were interconnected, so the plaint could not be rejected partially. The asserted entitlement under Section 53A was a matter for trial, not threshold rejection. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 14 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308869