Whether the court can reject plaint if plaintiff has not claimed appropriate reliefs?

 We have taken note that the grievance essentially put

forth by the respondents for which an application under

Order VII Rule 11 was filed, is that the appellant

herein, had not sought for an appropriate prayer to

declare the sale deeds dated 03.12.2015 and 26.02.2016 as

illegal, null and void and no court fee in that regard

was paid.

5. To that extent, we take note that the prayer, as

made, in any event, had been valued and the court fee has

been paid. Whether an appropriate prayer should have

sought, is a matter ultimately to be decided in the suit

and not an issue to be considered while deciding the

application under Order VII Rule 11 of CPC, in the manner

in which it had been done in the facts and circumstances

arising in the instant case.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL No. 4221 of 2023

SAJJAN SINGH  Vs  JASVIR KAUR & ORS.

Dated: 06th July, 2023.

1. Leave granted.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant as also

the learned counsel for the respondents and perused the

appeal papers.

3. In a suit filed by the appellant herein, the

respondents filed an application under Order VII Rule 11

of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short ‘CPC’)

which was, at the first instance, dismissed by the Trial

Court through its order dated 30.10.2017. The respondents

were therefore before the High Court in a Revision

Petition. The High Court having considered the matter,

has through its order dated 25.03.2019, allowed the

Revision Petition, and as a consequence, the application

filed under Order VII Rule 11 of CPC was allowed and the

plaint was rejected. It is in that light, the appellant

is before this Court.

2

4. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties,

we have taken note that the grievance essentially put

forth by the respondents for which an application under

Order VII Rule 11 was filed, is that the appellant

herein, had not sought for an appropriate prayer to

declare the sale deeds dated 03.12.2015 and 26.02.2016 as

illegal, null and void and no court fee in that regard

was paid.

5. To that extent, we take note that the prayer, as

made, in any event, had been valued and the court fee has

been paid. Whether an appropriate prayer should have

sought, is a matter ultimately to be decided in the suit

and not an issue to be considered while deciding the

application under Order VII Rule 11 of CPC, in the manner

in which it had been done in the facts and circumstances

arising in the instant case. Therefore, to that extent,

we are of the opinion that the High court was not

justified.

6. Hence, the Order dated 25.03.2019 passed by the

High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh is set

aside. The Civil Suit bearing C.S. No. 192/2016 dated

26.09.2015 is restored to the file of the learned

Additional Civil Judge(SD),Khamnon, District Fatehgarh

Sahib, Punjab to proceed further in the matter.

7. The contentions, as put forth by the respondents

herein, in the Order VII Rule 11 application, is open to

be taken up in the written statement and the Trial Court

will frame appropriate issues in that regard and all

contentions are left open for the parties to be urged in

that regard.

8. Appeal is accordingly disposed of along with the

pending application(s), if any.

...................J.

(A.S. BOPANNA)

...................J.

(M.M. SUNDRESH)

New Delhi

06th July, 2023

Print Page