https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458543 A plaint cannot be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 CPC unless the bar of law is apparent from the plaint itself; the court must confine itself to the plaint averments and accompanying documents, and cannot rely on the defendant's defence to test rejection. Where the plaint disclosed a cause of action alleging that property standing in the mother's name was acquired from family funds, that a gift deed was unauthorised and procured under undue influence, and that knowledge arose only later, questions of benami, limitation under Articles 58 and 59, admissions, and alleged suppression required evidence and could not be decided at the threshold. Rejection of only one relief was also impermissible when the suit as a whole was triable. The Section 340 CrPC application did not affect the suit at this stage. en-us Thu, 03 Aug 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 05 Nov 2024 19:48:52 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458543 A plaint cannot be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 CPC unless the bar of law is apparent from the plaint itself; the court must confine itself to the plaint averments and accompanying documents, and cannot rely on the defendant's defence to test rejection. Where the plaint disclosed a cause of action alleging that property standing in the mother's name was acquired from family funds, that a gift deed was unauthorised and procured under undue influence, and that knowledge arose only later, questions of benami, limitation under Articles 58 and 59, admissions, and alleged suppression required evidence and could not be decided at the threshold. Rejection of only one relief was also impermissible when the suit as a whole was triable. The Section 340 CrPC application did not affect the suit at this stage. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 03 Aug 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458543