{"id":371913,"date":"2026-01-07T13:00:18","date_gmt":"2026-01-07T07:30:18","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=371913"},"modified":"2026-01-08T17:37:04","modified_gmt":"2026-01-08T12:07:04","slug":"del-hc-order-vii-rule-11-partition-suit-cannot-be-rejected","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/07\/del-hc-order-vii-rule-11-partition-suit-cannot-be-rejected\/","title":{"rendered":"Partition suit pleading acquisition from joint family funds cannot be rejected at threshold, must go to trial: Delhi High Court"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Disclaimer: This has been reported after the availability of the order of the Court and not on media reports so as to give an accurate report to our readers.<\/p>\n

Delhi High Court:<\/span> In an appeal arose from a Single Judge’s order dated 10-09-2025, whereby an application filed by appellants under Order VII Rule 11<\/a> of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908<\/a> (CPC) seeking rejection of the plaint in partition suit was dismissed, a Division Bench of Anil Kshetarpal*<\/span> and Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar, JJ., affirmed the impugned order. And held that such partition suit cannot be rejected at threshold.<\/p>\n

The Court held that where the plaint pleads acquisition of property from joint family funds with sufficient foundational facts, then disputed questions regarding title, limitation, and effect of registered documents cannot be decided at the threshold and must await trial.<\/p>\n

The instant matter deals with dispute pertaining to two immovable properties, (i) Flat No. 115-D, Bathlas Co-operative Group Housing Society Ltd., I.P. Extension, Delhi (“Bathla Property”); and (ii) Plot No. 91, Maulsari Road, DLF Qutab Enclave, Phase-III, Gurugram (“Gurugram Property”).<\/p>\n

The plaintiff instituted a suit for partition, asserting that both properties were acquired from joint family funds, including proceeds derived from the sale of properties left behind by the deceased father. It was pleaded that the properties were intended for the benefit and welfare of the family as a whole. According to the plaintiff, though the Bathla Property stood in the name of Vinay Jauhari, he was barely 21 years of age at the time of booking, was pursuing his education, and had no independent source of income, and the property was, in fact, used by the deceased mother for residence.<\/p>\n

With respect to the Gurugram Property, it was purchased in the joint names of the deceased mother and Vinay. After Vinay’s death on 21-02-2018, disputes arose regarding partition. The plaintiff alleged that Appellants (Defendant 1 and 2) relied upon a Gift Deed dated 16-08-2005, purportedly executed by the deceased mother in favour of Vinay, which was never disclosed during her lifetime and came to the plaintiff’s knowledge only during proceedings initiated in 2018.<\/p>\n

The appellant disputed the very foundation of the suit and contended that the claim of acquisition from “joint family funds” was wholly misconceived and contrary to the admitted documentary record. They relied upon a Will dated 06-04-1976 executed by the deceased father bequeathing his estate to Vinay after conferring a life interest upon his wife, which was duly acted upon, including by execution of No Objection Certificates by the daughters.<\/p>\n

They further relied upon a registered Will dated 29-08-1985 executed by the deceased mother in favour of Vinay, as well as registered sale deeds, conveyance deeds, and the Gift Deed dated 16-08-2005. It was contended that title stood conclusively vested in Vinay and thereafter in appellants.<\/p>\n

The rejection of the plaint was sought on the grounds that it disclosed no cause of action, was barred by limitation, was vexatious and illusory, and that the plaintiff had not approached the Court with clean hands. Aggrieved by the refusal to reject the plaint, the appellants preferred the present intra-court appeal challenging the correctness of the said order<\/p>\n

The Court reiterated that while exercising jurisdiction under Order VII Rule 11<\/a> CPC<\/a>, the Courts are required to proceed on a meaningful reading of the plaint as a whole, assuming the averments therein to be correct, without embarking upon an enquiry into their truthfulness.<\/p>\n

The Court noted that the plaint contained “specific and unambiguous assertions” that the suit properties were acquired from joint family funds and proceeds of the father’s properties. If such pleadings were accepted at face value and ultimately substantiated, they would vest the plaintiff with a legally enforceable right as a co-sharer. The Court further noted that the defence that the properties were self-acquired or exclusively owned by Vinay was disputed questions of fact, which could not be adjudicated at the stage of Order VII Rule 11.<\/p>\n

Distinguishing Sagar Gambhir<\/span> v. Sukhdev Singh Gambhir<\/span>, 2017 SCC OnLine Del 7305<\/a> and Sunny<\/span> v. Raj Singh<\/span>, 2015 SCC OnLine Del 13446<\/a>, the Court held that unlike in those cases, the plaint herein was not bereft of material particulars regarding the source of acquisition of the properties.<\/p>\n

On limitation, the Court observed that a suit for partition is governed by Article 113 of the Limitation Act and that the cause of action is of a recurring nature, crystallising only upon refusal of a demand for partition. The Court noted that the plaint specifically averred that discussions for partition commenced only in 2018 and that refusal followed thereafter. Consequently, the Court held that the plea of limitation was a mixed question of law and fact, not amenable to determination at the threshold.<\/p>\n

The Court asserted that neither of the grounds urged for rejection of the plaint was made out. The Court held that the plaint, on a meaningful reading, disclosed a clear cause of action, and the reliefs claimed could not be held to be barred by limitation at the stage of Order VII Rule 11<\/a> CPC<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Accordingly, the Court found the appeal to be devoid of merit and dismissed the same.<\/p>\n

[Vibhuti Jauhari<\/span> v. Anita Munjal<\/span>, 2025 SCC OnLine Del 9569<\/a>, Decided on 24-12-2025<\/span>]<\/p>\n

*Judgment by Justice Anil Kshetarpal<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n\n

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

Mr. Krishnan Venugopal, Sr. Adv. along with Ms. Prity Sharma, Mr. Shikhar Shant, Mr. Ashwani Kaushik and Ms. Umang Motiyani, Counsel for the Appellants<\/p>\n

Mr. Samrat Nigam, Sr. Adv. along with Mr. Ajay Dabas, Mr. Anand Dabas, Ms. Priyanka Dagar, Ms. Arpita Rawat, Mr. Ravi Dagar and Mr. Rishikesh, Counsel for the Respondents<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

“The cause of action in a suit for partition is of a recurring nature and continues so long as the joint status subsists, crystallising only upon refusal of a demand for partition.”<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67514,"featured_media":371914,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[77579,12171,2543,45418,75265,83730,96378,47203,22434,5622,22424],"class_list":["post-371913","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-article-113-limitation-act","tag-cause-of-action","tag-Delhi_High_Court","tag-joint-family-property","tag-justice-anil-kshetarpal","tag-justice-harish-vaidyanathan-shankar","tag-limitation-in-partition-suits","tag-mixed-question-of-law-and-fact","tag-order-vii-rule-11-cpc","tag-partition-suit","tag-rejection-of-plaint"],"yoast_head":"\nDel HC: Partition suit cannot be rejected at threshold| SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Delhi High Court held that partition suit cannot be rejected at threshold under Order VII Rule 11 CPC where joint family acquisition is pleaded and limitation involves disputed questions of fact.\" \/>\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\/2026\/01\/07\/del-hc-order-vii-rule-11-partition-suit-cannot-be-rejected\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Partition suit pleading acquisition from joint family funds cannot be rejected at threshold, must go to trial: Delhi High Court\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Delhi High Court held that partition suit cannot be rejected at threshold under Order VII Rule 11 CPC where joint family acquisition is pleaded and limitation involves disputed questions of fact.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/07\/del-hc-order-vii-rule-11-partition-suit-cannot-be-rejected\/\" \/>\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=\"2026-01-07T07:30:18+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2026-01-08T12:07:04+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/Partition-suit-cannot-be-rejected.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"886\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"590\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Ritu\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Partition suit pleading acquisition from joint family funds cannot be rejected at threshold, must go to trial: Delhi High Court\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Ritu\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"5 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\/2026\/01\/07\/del-hc-order-vii-rule-11-partition-suit-cannot-be-rejected\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/07\/del-hc-order-vii-rule-11-partition-suit-cannot-be-rejected\/\",\"name\":\"Del HC: Partition suit cannot be rejected at threshold| SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/07\/del-hc-order-vii-rule-11-partition-suit-cannot-be-rejected\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/07\/del-hc-order-vii-rule-11-partition-suit-cannot-be-rejected\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/Partition-suit-cannot-be-rejected.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-01-07T07:30:18+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-01-08T12:07:04+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/392f265bae2f48f0f0d02b8e0e9015b9\"},\"description\":\"Delhi High Court held that partition suit cannot be rejected at threshold under Order VII Rule 11 CPC where joint family acquisition is pleaded and limitation involves disputed questions of fact.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/07\/del-hc-order-vii-rule-11-partition-suit-cannot-be-rejected\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/07\/del-hc-order-vii-rule-11-partition-suit-cannot-be-rejected\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/07\/del-hc-order-vii-rule-11-partition-suit-cannot-be-rejected\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/Partition-suit-cannot-be-rejected.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/Partition-suit-cannot-be-rejected.webp\",\"width\":886,\"height\":590,\"caption\":\"Partition suit cannot be rejected\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/07\/del-hc-order-vii-rule-11-partition-suit-cannot-be-rejected\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Partition suit pleading acquisition from joint family funds cannot be rejected at threshold, must go to trial: Delhi High Court\"}]},{\"@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\/392f265bae2f48f0f0d02b8e0e9015b9\",\"name\":\"Ritu\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c47318594774c1fe55e3e8c85dcd1909276373d9bf11730032fc1a7d05d56a47?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c47318594774c1fe55e3e8c85dcd1909276373d9bf11730032fc1a7d05d56a47?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Ritu\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_7\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Del HC: Partition suit cannot be rejected at threshold| SCC Times","description":"Delhi High Court held that partition suit cannot be rejected at threshold under Order VII Rule 11 CPC where joint family acquisition is pleaded and limitation involves disputed questions of fact.","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\/2026\/01\/07\/del-hc-order-vii-rule-11-partition-suit-cannot-be-rejected\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Partition suit pleading acquisition from joint family funds cannot be rejected at threshold, must go to trial: Delhi High Court","og_description":"Delhi High Court held that partition suit cannot be rejected at threshold under Order VII Rule 11 CPC where joint family acquisition is pleaded and limitation involves disputed questions of fact.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/07\/del-hc-order-vii-rule-11-partition-suit-cannot-be-rejected\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2026-01-07T07:30:18+00:00","article_modified_time":"2026-01-08T12:07:04+00:00","og_image":[{"width":886,"height":590,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/Partition-suit-cannot-be-rejected.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Ritu","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Partition suit pleading acquisition from joint family funds cannot be rejected at threshold, must go to trial: Delhi High Court","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Ritu","Est. reading time":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/07\/del-hc-order-vii-rule-11-partition-suit-cannot-be-rejected\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/07\/del-hc-order-vii-rule-11-partition-suit-cannot-be-rejected\/","name":"Del HC: Partition suit cannot be rejected at threshold| SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/07\/del-hc-order-vii-rule-11-partition-suit-cannot-be-rejected\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/07\/del-hc-order-vii-rule-11-partition-suit-cannot-be-rejected\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/Partition-suit-cannot-be-rejected.webp","datePublished":"2026-01-07T07:30:18+00:00","dateModified":"2026-01-08T12:07:04+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/392f265bae2f48f0f0d02b8e0e9015b9"},"description":"Delhi High Court held that partition suit cannot be rejected at threshold under Order VII Rule 11 CPC where joint family acquisition is pleaded and limitation involves disputed questions of fact.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/07\/del-hc-order-vii-rule-11-partition-suit-cannot-be-rejected\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/07\/del-hc-order-vii-rule-11-partition-suit-cannot-be-rejected\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/07\/del-hc-order-vii-rule-11-partition-suit-cannot-be-rejected\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/Partition-suit-cannot-be-rejected.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/Partition-suit-cannot-be-rejected.webp","width":886,"height":590,"caption":"Partition suit cannot be rejected"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/07\/del-hc-order-vii-rule-11-partition-suit-cannot-be-rejected\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Partition suit pleading acquisition from joint family funds cannot be rejected at threshold, must go to trial: Delhi High Court"}]},{"@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\/392f265bae2f48f0f0d02b8e0e9015b9","name":"Ritu","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c47318594774c1fe55e3e8c85dcd1909276373d9bf11730032fc1a7d05d56a47?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c47318594774c1fe55e3e8c85dcd1909276373d9bf11730032fc1a7d05d56a47?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Ritu"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_7\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/Partition-suit-cannot-be-rejected.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":306269,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/11\/03\/part-rejection-of-plaint-impermissible-under-order-7-rule-11-cpc-supreme-court\/","url_meta":{"origin":371913,"position":0},"title":"Part rejection of plaint impermissible under Order VII Rule 11 of CPC: Supreme Court","author":"Ridhi","date":"November 3, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cThe approach adopted by the High Court is incorrect and contrary to the well-entrenched principles of considering an application under Order VII Rule 11 of CPC.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Part rejection of plaint","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/Part-rejection-of-plaint.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/Part-rejection-of-plaint.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/Part-rejection-of-plaint.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/Part-rejection-of-plaint.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":357349,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/22\/builders-agreement-cant-modify-family-settlement-share-del-hc\/","url_meta":{"origin":371913,"position":1},"title":"Share apportioned by a Family Settlement Agreement cannot be modified by Builder\u2019s Agreement: Delhi High Court","author":"Editor","date":"August 22, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cOnce, by virtue of the Memorandum of Family Settlement, the respective shares of the family members were identified, the Builders\u2019 Agreement, which is essentially an agreement to construct the building, will not result in its modification or novation.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"builder's agreement can't modify family settlement","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/builders-agreement-cant-modify-family-settlement.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/builders-agreement-cant-modify-family-settlement.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/builders-agreement-cant-modify-family-settlement.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/builders-agreement-cant-modify-family-settlement.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":217735,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/06\/del-hc-partition-suit-rejected-under-or-7-r-11-cpc-for-want-of-cause-of-action-in-light-of-general-power-of-attorney-and-requisition-deed\/","url_meta":{"origin":371913,"position":2},"title":"Del HC | Partition suit rejected under Or. 7 R. 11 CPC for want of cause of action in light of General Power of Attorney and Requisition Deed","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"August 6, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Delhi High Court:\u00a0Pratibha M. Singh, J. allowed an application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC filed by the defendant in the subject partition suit. The said application sought rejection of plaint (partition suit) on two grounds -- that the suit lacked cause of action and the suit was time-barred. The\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":362905,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/10\/08\/bom-hc-brothers-property-dispute-appeal-dismissed\/","url_meta":{"origin":371913,"position":3},"title":"Bombay HC dismisses appeal in property dispute between brothers over alleged fraudulent gift deed","author":"Editor","date":"October 8, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cIt was arguable that an educated person had executed a document which was registered and then claimed ignorance of the nature of the transfer, which could not be fathomed.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"brothers property dispute appeal dismissed","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/brothers-property-dispute-appeal-dismissed.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/brothers-property-dispute-appeal-dismissed.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/brothers-property-dispute-appeal-dismissed.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/brothers-property-dispute-appeal-dismissed.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":371073,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/12\/29\/del-hc-refund-of-court-fees-remand-rejection-of-plaint-scc-times\/","url_meta":{"origin":371913,"position":4},"title":"Remand after reversal of Rejection of Plaint creates entitlement to refund of Court fees: Delhi High Court","author":"Ritu","date":"December 29, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cOrder XLI Rule 23 of the CPC envisages remand in a situation in which the suit was decreed by the Court of first instance on a preliminary point and the decree is reversed in appeal by the appellate court.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"refund of Court fees","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/refund-of-Court-fees.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/refund-of-Court-fees.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/refund-of-Court-fees.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/refund-of-Court-fees.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":254662,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/24\/law-on-rejection-of-plaint-under-order-vii-rule-11-of-cpc-as-explained-by-the-supreme-court\/","url_meta":{"origin":371913,"position":5},"title":"Law on rejection of plaint under\u00a0Order\u00a0VII\u00a0Rule\u00a011\u00a0of\u00a0CPC as explained by the Supreme Court","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"September 24, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: The bench of L. Nageswara Rao and BR Gavai*, JJ has lucidly explained the law on rejection of plaints under\u00a0Order\u00a0VII\u00a0Rule\u00a011\u00a0of\u00a0CPC for want of cause of action and has held that in each the question that will have to be considered is as to whether the reliefs as claimed\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-2-7.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-2-7.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-2-7.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-2-7.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-2-7.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/371913","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\/67514"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=371913"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/371913\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/371914"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=371913"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=371913"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=371913"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}