TMI Blog2014 (3) TMI 1177X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... igh Court and thereby Plaintiff No. 2 being the son, cannot have any cause of action in the matter. In view of the above, the High Court reversed the order of the trial court, allowed the application and rejected the plaint. Being aggrieved, this appeal has been filed on the ground that the said property is a trust property and that the Appellant has a right to reside there as one of the trustees, and that he as a legal heir and son of the Respondent, is entitled to reside in the suit property in terms of the trust deed. The High Court has correctly perused the plaint in its entirety and after deletion of the name of Plaintiff No. 1 from the said Title Suit, held that the plaint discloses no cause of action after taking into account the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ther) 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 Plaintiffs by any means prejudicial to the interest of the Plaintiffs. b) For a decree permanent injunction restraining the Defendants, their men, agents and associated from causing any obstruction towards free ingress and egress of the Plaintiffs, for use and occupation of the suit flat at 5, Netai Babu Lane, Kolkata-700 012, in any manner prejudicial to the interest of the Plaintiffs. c) Temporary injunction with ad-interim order in terms of pra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fe 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 sum of ₹ 2,00,000/- by account payee cheque of any nationalised bank in the name of the wife to be handed over to the learned Advocate for the Appellant and will pay the balance amount of ₹ 2,00,000/- by March, 2009. If the first instalment of ₹ 2,00,000/- is paid, from that moment, the husband will pay the monthly alimony at the rate of ₹ 2,500/- instead of the existing alimony of ₹ 5,000/-. The moment the balance amount of ₹ 2,00,000/- will be paid, the husband ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 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, and accordingly held that Plaintiff No. 2 has no independent cause of action to proceed with the suit and the handing over of possession of the suit premises is nothing but to carry out an order passed by the High Court and thereby Plaintiff No. 2 being the son, cannot have any cause of action in the matter. In view of the above, the High Court reversed the order of the trial court, allowed the application and rejected the plaint. Being aggrieved, this appeal has been filed on the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ises, 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 with the said order. After handing over the possession in terms of the order dated 22nd August, 2008, there was no cause of action subsisting in Title Suit No. 2430 of 2007. In these circumstances, it is submitted that the order passed by the City Civil Court, Calcutta, rejecting the said application of the Respondent under Order VII Rule 11 is wrong. The ground that the said trial court did not consider that the cause of action in the suit was in connection with the possession o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r 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 fails to comply Sub-rule (2) of Rule 9; Provided that the time fixed by the Court for the correction of the valuation or supplying of the requisite stamp-paper shall not be extended unless the Court, for reasons to be recorded, is satisfied that the Plaintiff was prevented by any cause of an exceptional nature for correcting the valuation or supplying the requisite stamp-paper, as the case may be, within the time fixed by the Court and that refusal to extend such time would cause grave injustice to the Plaintiff. 12. After ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
