{"id":317658,"date":"2024-03-18T17:30:38","date_gmt":"2024-03-18T12:00:38","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=317658"},"modified":"2024-04-03T17:56:17","modified_gmt":"2024-04-03T12:26:17","slug":"delhi-high-court-upholds-trial-court-order-dismissing-order7-rule11-application-due-procedural-considerations-legal-news","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/18\/delhi-high-court-upholds-trial-court-order-dismissing-order7-rule11-application-due-procedural-considerations-legal-news\/","title":{"rendered":"Issue of limitation cannot be decided without recording of evidence, once it becomes a mixed question of law and fact: Delhi High Court upholds Trial Court\u2019s dismissal of Order 7 Rule 11"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Delhi High Court:<\/span> A petition was filed by the petitioner (defendant) assailing the impugned order dated 13-09-2023 passed by Trial Court whereby her application under Order VII Rule 11<\/a> of Civil Procedure Code<\/a> (CPC) was dismissed. Dharmesh Sharma, J., upholds the impugned order on finding no illegality, perversity or incorrect approach adopted by the Trial Court in dismissing the application under Order VII Rule 11<\/a> CPC<\/a> vide order dated 13-09-2023.<\/p>\n

The Court stated that \u201cAt this stage of the case, on a meaningful perusal of the pleadings\/averments in the plaint filed by the respondent\/plaintiff, it is difficult to discern that the suit is barred by limitation, as claimed by the petitioner. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the issue of limitation becomes a mixed question of law and fact, which cannot be decided without recording of evidence.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

The case revolves around a dispute regarding the ownership and possession of a property located near Kamal Hotel, Nai Basti, Anand Parvat, Delhi. In the instant case, the respondent submitted that he purchased the property in his own name in 2002 and the petitioner had sought his help in her divorce case against her husband. The respondent claims ownership of the first, second, and third floors of the property, alleging that it was purchased by him through various sale documents dated 29-04-2002. The petitioner on the other hand, asserts her right to reside on the second floor of the property, claiming that she had contributed towards the purchase of the property and had been allowed to reside there by the respondent without payment of rent.<\/p>\n

The respondent filed a suit against the petitioner seeking mandatory injunction, recovery of possession, damages, and mesne profit. The petitioner, in response, filed an application under Order VII Rule 11<\/a> of the Code of Civil Procedure<\/a>, contending that the suit lacked a cause of action and was barred by limitation arguing that the respondent was not the rightful owner of the property and that she had acquired ownership through adverse possession which was thereby dismissed.<\/p>\n

Counsel for petitioner argued that the suit was barred by limitation as per Article 65 Schedule I<\/a> of the Limitation Act, 1963<\/a>, which prescribes a limitation period of 12 years for filing a suit for possession of immovable property. Additionally, the petitioner claimed adverse possession under Section 27<\/a> of the Limitation Act<\/a>. However, the Trial Court rejected the petitioner’s application, emphasizing that the decision to reject a plaint should be based solely on the allegations made therein, without considering the defendant’s defenses.<\/p>\n

Upon examining the pleadings and averments in the plaint, the Court found it challenging to ascertain whether the suit was indeed barred by limitation. The issue of limitation, in this case, was deemed a mixed question of law and fact, necessitating evidence to be recorded. Furthermore, the Court noted that determining the petitioner’s claim of adverse possession and property ownership would require delving into her defense, which was not appropriate at the preliminary stage of the case.<\/p>\n

The Court emphasized that while considering an application under Order VII Rule 11<\/a> CPC<\/a>, the focus should be solely on the averments in the plaint, without considering the defendant’s pleas in the written statement. Rejecting the petitioner’s application, the Court asserted that the petitioner would have ample opportunity to contest the suit on its merits during the trial.<\/p>\n

Thus, the Court found no illegality, perversity, or incorrect approach in the Trial Court’s decision to dismiss the petitioner’s application under Order VII Rule 11<\/a> CPC<\/a>. Consequently, the civil revision petition was dismissed, and the pending application was disposed of without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties. It was clarified that the order did not express any opinion on the merits of the case, leaving it open for further adjudication during the trial proceedings.<\/p>\n

[Parveen Bala v. Bhimsen Mehta, 2024 SCC OnLine Del 1898<\/a>, decided on 11-03-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n

\n

Advocates who appeared in this case:<\/p>\n

Mr. Gurmukh Singh Arora and Mr. Vansh Bajaj, Advocate for petitioner<\/p>\n

Mr. Harsh Tikoo Advocate for respondent<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Delhi High Court held that the dismissal of the petitioner’s application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC was warranted, emphasizing the need to focus solely on the allegations in the plaint at the preliminary stage because the issues regarding limitation and adverse possession required further evidence and examination, which could not be resolved without a full trial.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67516,"featured_media":314886,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[36995,61897,12171,8331,27414,2543,42449,32260,31822,66516],"class_list":["post-317658","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-adverse-possession","tag-barred-by-limitation","tag-cause-of-action","tag-civil-procedure-code","tag-cpc","tag-Delhi_High_Court","tag-order-vii-rule-11","tag-ownership","tag-protection-of-women-from-domestic-violence-act-2005","tag-sale-documents"],"yoast_head":"\nDelhi HC upholds Trial Court order dismissing O 7 Rule 11 application | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Delhi High Court upholds Trial Court order dismissing Order 7 Rule 11 application due to procedural considerations.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/18\/delhi-high-court-upholds-trial-court-order-dismissing-order7-rule11-application-due-procedural-considerations-legal-news\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Delhi High Court upholds Trial Court\u2019s dismissal of Order 7 Rule 11 application due to procedural considerations\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Delhi High Court upholds Trial Court order dismissing Order 7 Rule 11 application due to procedural considerations.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/18\/delhi-high-court-upholds-trial-court-order-dismissing-order7-rule11-application-due-procedural-considerations-legal-news\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2024-03-18T12:00:38+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2024-04-03T12:26:17+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"591\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Arunima\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Issue of limitation cannot be decided without recording of evidence, once it becomes a mixed question of law and fact: Delhi High Court upholds Trial Court\u2019s dismissal of Order 7 Rule 11\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Arunima\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"3 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/18\/delhi-high-court-upholds-trial-court-order-dismissing-order7-rule11-application-due-procedural-considerations-legal-news\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/18\/delhi-high-court-upholds-trial-court-order-dismissing-order7-rule11-application-due-procedural-considerations-legal-news\/\",\"name\":\"Delhi HC upholds Trial Court order dismissing O 7 Rule 11 application | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/18\/delhi-high-court-upholds-trial-court-order-dismissing-order7-rule11-application-due-procedural-considerations-legal-news\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/18\/delhi-high-court-upholds-trial-court-order-dismissing-order7-rule11-application-due-procedural-considerations-legal-news\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2024-03-18T12:00:38+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2024-04-03T12:26:17+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/12b21fd8f65a572f39f27151710e16cb\"},\"description\":\"Delhi High Court upholds Trial Court order dismissing Order 7 Rule 11 application due to procedural considerations.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/18\/delhi-high-court-upholds-trial-court-order-dismissing-order7-rule11-application-due-procedural-considerations-legal-news\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/18\/delhi-high-court-upholds-trial-court-order-dismissing-order7-rule11-application-due-procedural-considerations-legal-news\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/18\/delhi-high-court-upholds-trial-court-order-dismissing-order7-rule11-application-due-procedural-considerations-legal-news\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp\",\"width\":887,\"height\":591,\"caption\":\"Delhi High Court\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/18\/delhi-high-court-upholds-trial-court-order-dismissing-order7-rule11-application-due-procedural-considerations-legal-news\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Issue of limitation cannot be decided without recording of evidence, once it becomes a mixed question of law and fact: Delhi High Court upholds Trial Court\u2019s dismissal of Order 7 Rule 11\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/12b21fd8f65a572f39f27151710e16cb\",\"name\":\"Arunima\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/8375ad8b08b1cbd970f4484d3218d81f3222a0ee3e463210f657780cb13e9569?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/8375ad8b08b1cbd970f4484d3218d81f3222a0ee3e463210f657780cb13e9569?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Arunima\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/scc-editor_9\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Delhi HC upholds Trial Court order dismissing O 7 Rule 11 application | SCC Times","description":"Delhi High Court upholds Trial Court order dismissing Order 7 Rule 11 application due to procedural considerations.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/18\/delhi-high-court-upholds-trial-court-order-dismissing-order7-rule11-application-due-procedural-considerations-legal-news\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Delhi High Court upholds Trial Court\u2019s dismissal of Order 7 Rule 11 application due to procedural considerations","og_description":"Delhi High Court upholds Trial Court order dismissing Order 7 Rule 11 application due to procedural considerations.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/18\/delhi-high-court-upholds-trial-court-order-dismissing-order7-rule11-application-due-procedural-considerations-legal-news\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2024-03-18T12:00:38+00:00","article_modified_time":"2024-04-03T12:26:17+00:00","og_image":[{"width":887,"height":591,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Arunima","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Issue of limitation cannot be decided without recording of evidence, once it becomes a mixed question of law and fact: Delhi High Court upholds Trial Court\u2019s dismissal of Order 7 Rule 11","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Arunima","Est. reading time":"3 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/18\/delhi-high-court-upholds-trial-court-order-dismissing-order7-rule11-application-due-procedural-considerations-legal-news\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/18\/delhi-high-court-upholds-trial-court-order-dismissing-order7-rule11-application-due-procedural-considerations-legal-news\/","name":"Delhi HC upholds Trial Court order dismissing O 7 Rule 11 application | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/18\/delhi-high-court-upholds-trial-court-order-dismissing-order7-rule11-application-due-procedural-considerations-legal-news\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/18\/delhi-high-court-upholds-trial-court-order-dismissing-order7-rule11-application-due-procedural-considerations-legal-news\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp","datePublished":"2024-03-18T12:00:38+00:00","dateModified":"2024-04-03T12:26:17+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/12b21fd8f65a572f39f27151710e16cb"},"description":"Delhi High Court upholds Trial Court order dismissing Order 7 Rule 11 application due to procedural considerations.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/18\/delhi-high-court-upholds-trial-court-order-dismissing-order7-rule11-application-due-procedural-considerations-legal-news\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/18\/delhi-high-court-upholds-trial-court-order-dismissing-order7-rule11-application-due-procedural-considerations-legal-news\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/18\/delhi-high-court-upholds-trial-court-order-dismissing-order7-rule11-application-due-procedural-considerations-legal-news\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp","width":887,"height":591,"caption":"Delhi High Court"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/18\/delhi-high-court-upholds-trial-court-order-dismissing-order7-rule11-application-due-procedural-considerations-legal-news\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Issue of limitation cannot be decided without recording of evidence, once it becomes a mixed question of law and fact: Delhi High Court upholds Trial Court\u2019s dismissal of Order 7 Rule 11"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/12b21fd8f65a572f39f27151710e16cb","name":"Arunima","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/8375ad8b08b1cbd970f4484d3218d81f3222a0ee3e463210f657780cb13e9569?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/8375ad8b08b1cbd970f4484d3218d81f3222a0ee3e463210f657780cb13e9569?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Arunima"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/scc-editor_9\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":299744,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/21\/delhi-hc-directs-family-court-judges-to-judiciously-use-legal-provisions-expeditious-disposal-petitions\/","url_meta":{"origin":317658,"position":0},"title":"Delhi High Court directs Family Court Judges to judiciously use the legal provisions for expeditious disposal of petitions","author":"Editor","date":"August 21, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cScrupulous adherence to Order VII Rule 11 of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 can curtail litigation like the present one, which aside from clogging the litigation also keeps the parties embroiled in litigation with a false hope of some relief.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"delhi high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":260477,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/21\/law-on-rejection-of-plaint\/","url_meta":{"origin":317658,"position":1},"title":"Law on Rejection of Plaint | Contents of plaint or Examining sufficiency of plaint? Del HC explains the bounden duty of Court","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"January 21, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Delhi High Court: Prateek Jalan, J., expressed that, For the purposes of an order under Order VII Rule 11 of the CPC, the Court must come to the conclusion that the plaint is required to be rejected. Present petition was filed under Article 227 of the Constitution for directing against\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Delhi High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/Delhi-High-Court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/Delhi-High-Court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/Delhi-High-Court.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/Delhi-High-Court.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/Delhi-High-Court.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":315631,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/29\/calcutta-high-court-upholds-rejection-of-order-vii-rule-11-cpc-application-scc-times-legal-news-research\/","url_meta":{"origin":317658,"position":2},"title":"Calcutta High Court upholds rejection of Order VII Rule 11 CPC application despite disclosure of Cause of Action through \u2018clever drafting\u2019","author":"Ritu","date":"February 29, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"Calcutta High Court stated that \u201cOrder VII, Rule 11 is applicable to the plaint which does not disclose cause of action and not the cases where the plea is non-existence of cause of action.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Calcutta High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Calcutta-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Calcutta-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Calcutta-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Calcutta-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":275119,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/06\/delhi-high-court-negligence-of-counsel-not-a-reasonable-ground-within-order-xi-rule-15-cpc-facts-of-the-case-must-disclose-urgency-to-avail-benefit-under-or-xi-r-14-cpc\/","url_meta":{"origin":317658,"position":3},"title":"Delhi High Court| Negligence of counsel not a reasonable ground within Order XI Rule 1(5) CPC; Facts of the case must disclose \u2018urgency\u2019 to avail benefit under Or. XI R. 1(4) CPC","author":"Editor","date":"October 6, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"\u00a0 \u00a0 Delhi High Court: In a case filed by the petitioner challenging dismissal order in relation to an application filed seeking to place on record, certain additional documents which, according to the application, were a necessary and essential part of the suit, but could not be filed with the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Delhi High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/delhi_high_court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/delhi_high_court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/delhi_high_court.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/delhi_high_court.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/delhi_high_court.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":306964,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/11\/10\/delhi-hc-allows-appeal-by-patanjali-ayurved-against-meta-platforms-offence-video-trademark-infringement-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":317658,"position":4},"title":"Delhi High Court allows appeal by Patanjali Ayurved against Meta Platforms Inc in a trademark suit; Directs Trial Court to decide matter afresh","author":"Arunima","date":"November 10, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"The grievance of Patanjali Ayurved is that a video has been uploaded by respondent on the internet platforms owned by Meta Inc. having an advertisement of mens undergarments, wherein Patanjali\u2019s trademark along with pictures of its brand ambassadors and directors are shown used unauthorizedly.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"delhi high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":315600,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/29\/civil-court-jurisdiction-barred-by-section-85-of-waqf-act-cal-hc-allows-application-under-order-vii-rule-11d-cpc-scc-times\/","url_meta":{"origin":317658,"position":5},"title":"Civil Court lacks jurisdiction over Waqf Property disputes: Calcutta High Court","author":"Ritu","date":"February 29, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"Calcutta High Court held that \u201cin order to decide whether the suit is barred by any law, it is the statement in the plaint which will have to be construed.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Calcutta High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Calcutta-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Calcutta-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Calcutta-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Calcutta-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/317658","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67516"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=317658"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/317658\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/314886"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=317658"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=317658"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=317658"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}