TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (3) TMI 1177
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short 'the Code') was allowed and the plaint was rejected. The High Court set aside the order passed by the Trial Court refusing such prayer. 3. The facts of the case, briefly, are as follows: 3.1) A suit was filed for declaration and injunction by the Appellant along with Smt. Ashima Sen, mother of the present Appellant. The Appellant herein and Plaintiff No. 1 (the mother) filed a suit being Title Suit being No. 2430 of 2007 before the City Civil Court at Calcutta, and the following reliefs were prayed for in the said suit: a) For a decree for declaration that the Defendant, his men and agents have no right to obstruct the user of the suit flat by the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he Defendant filed a suit for dissolution of marriage in the City Civil Court at Calcutta which was transferred before the Family Court and on 15th July, 1998 a decree for dissolution of marriage was passed by the Family Court against Plaintiff No. 1. Being aggrieved, she preferred an appeal before the High Court which, in turn, was pleased to pass the following order: In the facts of the present case, we are of the view that a sum of Rs. 4,00,000/- should be paid by the husband to the wife provided the wife hands over the vacant possession of the rooms over which she has already filed a suit in the City Civil Court to the husband within a month from today. Simultaneously, with the surrender of possession, the husband will pay a su....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tated that the remaining Plaintiff had no cause of action to institute the suit against the Defendant and that the plaint does not disclose any cause of action. 6. After hearing the parties, the City Civil Court at Calcutta was pleased to reject the said application on 13th December, 2010. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the said order, a revision petition was filed against the said order by Subhas Chandra Sil, being the Defendant in the said suit before the High Court. The High Court after perusing the facts as stated hereinabove, and after considering the averments made in the plaint held that after deleting the name of Plaintiff No. 1 from the plaint, it is clear from the averments that the plaint discloses no cause of action, a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... at the said premises with his mother. It is further submitted that he has a right to occupy the said premises in terms of the registered deed of settlement. He further stated that in accordance with the deed of settlement, after the death of the original settlor Mrinalini Dassi, the trust property would devolve for the use and benefit of her male heir in the male line in equal shares absolutely and for ever. Therefore, it is contended that he has a right to stay in the said premises, and accordingly submitted that the plaint discloses no cause of action. 10. Per contra, it is submitted that the possession was handed over by the mother and son pursuant to the directions given by the High Court and the premises were vacated in compliance ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aint The plaint shall be rejected in the following cases:- (a) where it does not disclose a cause of action; (b) where the relief claimed is undervalued, and the Plaintiff, on being required by the Court to correct the valuation within a time to be fixed by the Court, fails to do so; (c) where the relief claimed is properly valued but the plaint is written upon paper insufficiently stamped, and the Plaintiff, on being required by the Court to supply the requisite stamp-paper within a time to be fixed by the Court, fails to do so; (d) where the suit appears from the statement in the plaint to be barred by any law: (e) where it is not filed in duplicate; (f) where the Plaintiff fa....