Citation Name : 2014 YLR 154 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT-NWFP Side Appellant : BAKHTIAR KHAN Side Opponent : QASIM JAN S. 12---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O. VII, R. 11---Suit for specific performance of contract---Rejection of plaint---Scope---Contention of defendants was that suit being time-barred was not maintainable---Application for rejection of plaint was dismissed---Validity---Averments made in the plaint were of prime consideration for determining the disclosure of cause of action but same alone was not the sole criteria for such purpose---Written statement and documents available with the plaint could be looked into for determining the disclosure of cause of action---Question of rejection of plaint could be considered at any stage of proceedings of the case---Plaint should be rejected when cause for rejection of the same appeared and even same could be rejected at appellate and revisional stage---Scope of O. VII, R. 11, C.P.C. was limited---Purpose behind the rejection of plaint was to protect the defending party from the agonies of the protracted trial in the civil matters and such would save the time of the court---Such provision of law should be exercised only when the courts came to the conclusion that even if the averments made in the plaint were proved, the plaintiff would not be able to get any relief or no useful purpose would be achieved by keeping the suit pending---Question of limitation was considered as a mixed question of law and fact and its determination would require recording of evidence but not in all cases---Question of limitation was clear in the present case and same would call for no evidence---Plaintiffs had filed suit for specific performance after 12/13 years after filing of application for partition by the defendants which was time-barred---Both the parties were co-sharers and plaintiffs were enjoying the possession of joint property---Order passed by the Trial Court was not in accordance with law---Trial Court had failed to exercise its jurisdiction in accordance with law which was amenable to the revisional jurisdiction---High Court could grant relief of rejection of plaint---Plaint was rejected.
Posted on: Tue, 22 Jul 2014 14:10:47 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015