https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465771 The dominant issue was whether the plaint disclosed a real cause of action or was barred by limitation so as to warrant rejection under Order VII Rule 11(a) and (d) CPC. The SC held that the suit was founded on an alleged error in a 1953 partition deed, and that by omitting any direct relief against that deed the plaintiffs attempted, through clever drafting, to evade the Limitation Act and project an illusory, vexatious cause of action. Applying the principle that limitation cannot be circumvented by artful pleadings, the SC concluded the suit was an abuse of process; the plaint was rejected and the HC and trial court orders refusing rejection were set aside. en-us Fri, 28 Apr 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 08 Jan 2026 21:13:45 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465771 The dominant issue was whether the plaint disclosed a real cause of action or was barred by limitation so as to warrant rejection under Order VII Rule 11(a) and (d) CPC. The SC held that the suit was founded on an alleged error in a 1953 partition deed, and that by omitting any direct relief against that deed the plaintiffs attempted, through clever drafting, to evade the Limitation Act and project an illusory, vexatious cause of action. Applying the principle that limitation cannot be circumvented by artful pleadings, the SC concluded the suit was an abuse of process; the plaint was rejected and the HC and trial court orders refusing rejection were set aside. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 28 Apr 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465771