Court Determines No Cause of Action Against Defendant No. 1 in Suit Filed by Beverley Singh
In a recent ruling, the Himachal Pradesh High Court addressed a property dispute case involving Beverley Singh as the plaintiff and Tejinder Singh, among others, as defendants. The court, presided over by Justice Virender Singh, was tasked with evaluating an application under Order VII, Rule 11, and Order I, Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which sought to reject the plaint or alternatively, to delete Defendant No. 1 from the list of parties.
The case centered around a civil suit filed by Beverley Singh seeking a Permanent Prohibitory Injunction to prevent the defendants from transferring or encumbering certain properties located in Dharamshala, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh. The properties in question were allegedly transferred to Defendant No. 2 by Defendant No. 1 through a settlement deed dated July 29, 2015.
Defendant No. 1 argued that they had no ownership or control over the properties since they had been transferred to Defendant No. 2, and thus, no cause of action existed against them. The court evaluated the plaint and accompanying documents, noting that the settlement deeds executed in favor of the plaintiff and Defendant No. 2 contained provisions that did not allow Defendant No. 1 to alter the property rights.
Justice Virender Singh highlighted that for an application under Order VII, Rule 11 to succeed, the plaint must fail to disclose any cause of action. In this case, the court found that the plaintiff's claims did not establish a real cause of action against Defendant No. 1, as the property had already been transferred to another party. Consequently, the court ordered the deletion of Defendant No. 1 from the suit under Order I, Rule 10 of the CPC, while maintaining the suit against the remaining defendant.
The decision underscores the importance of clearly establishing a cause of action in civil suits and reaffirms the court's role in filtering out claims that lack legal standing to proceed. The case is scheduled to continue against Defendant No. 2, with the next hearing set for December 19, 2025.
Bottom Line:
Rejection of plaint under Order 7, Rule 11 CPC requires the court to determine if the plaint discloses a cause of action based on the averments and documents. In case of multiple defendants, the suit cannot be rejected against one defendant alone; however, under Order 1, Rule 10 CPC, the name of a party without cause of action can be deleted from the array of parties.
Statutory provision(s): Order VII, Rule 11 CPC, Order I, Rule 10 CPC, Section 41(j) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963
Beverley Singh v. Tejinder Singh, (Himachal Pradesh) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2814032
