2016 (1) TMI 1482

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....id date, during course of submission, learned counsel for the opposite parties took adjournment to go through the decision reported in Vol. 96 (2003) CLT 323 for appropriate response to the Court and the matter was therefore adjourned to today. Today, at the start of hearing, learned counsel for opposite parties also prayed for adjournment. In view of the repeated adjournment, this Court is not inclined to grant any further adjournment and the matter is decided only on merit. In assailing the impugned order passed by the Revisional Authority, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that in a matter for consideration of an application under Order 7 Rule 11 of C.P.C. on merit, the Revisional Court has a limited jurisdiction to cons....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....here is no infirmity or impropriety in the impugned order leaving no scope for this Court for interfering in the order passed by the Revisional Authority. Further in referring to the Orissa amendment of the Section 115 of C.P.C., learned counsel for the opposite parties contended that in view of the amendment brought in the year 2010 and the suit being of the year 2009, the Revision was very much maintainable. Heard. Considering the submissions made by the respective parties and on perusal of the decision as reported in 2004 (9) SC 512, this Court finds the observations of the Apex Court that in view of the provision available at that point of time and further considering the fact that refusal of rejection of a plaint is in a natur....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s of law, but since the effect of rejection of a plaint under Order 7, Rule 11(a) has the force of a decree, the revisional court should not pass an order rejecting a plaint while exercising jurisdiction under Section 115. The above view gains support from the ratio in the case of Purusottam Das and sons Vrs. S. B. I, Vol. 33(1991) OJC 228 (Civil). Looking to the settled position of law already given by this Court as referred to herein above, this Court finds force in the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner to the extent that the Revisional Authority has a limited role in the matter of hearing on rejection of an application under Order 7 Rule 11 of C.P.C. and in the event, it feels that there is some substance in considering....