Order VII Rule 11 CPC – Plaint Can’t Be Rejected If Limitation Is A Mixed Question Of Law & Fact
Case: Salim D.Agboatwala and others v.Shamalji Oddavji Thakkar and others
Coram: JusticeHemant Gupta & Justice V. Ramasubramanian
Case No: CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5641 OF 2021
Court Observation: “…the rejection of the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 is a drastic power conferred on the Court to terminate a civil action at the threshold. Therefore, the conditions precedent to the exercise of the power are stringent and it is especially so when rejection of plaint is sought on the ground of limitation. When a plaintiff claims that he gained knowledge of the essential facts giving rise to the cause of action only at a particular point of time, the same has to be accepted at the stage of considering the application under Order VII Rule 11”
“Insofar as the rejection of the plaint on the ground of limitation is concerned, it is needless to emphasis that limitation is a mixed question of fact and law”
“We are dealing with a case where the plaintiffs assert in no uncertain terms that notices were never ordered to them nor served on them. Therefore, the answer to the issue regarding limitation will depend upon the evidence with regard to the issuance and service of notice and the knowledge of the plaintiffs. Hence, the Trial Court, as well as the High Court, were not right in rejecting the plaint on the ground of limitation, especially in the facts and circumstances of this case”
“…we are of the considered view that the Trial Court, as well as the High Court, were clearly in error in rejecting the plaint under Order VII Rule 11(d). Hence, the appeal is allowed, the judgment and decree of the Trial Court, as well as the High Court, are set aside and the suit is restored to file”
[doc id=9733]
Previous Posts
Bar U/s 9(3) Arbitration Act Not Applicable If Application Was Taken Up By Court Before Constitution Of Arbitration Tribunal: Supreme Court Download Judgement
