IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THIS THE 29th DAY OF JUNE, 2010 CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.5665 of 2009 Between:
Shaik Mahaboob ... PETITIONER(S) and Durgah – E – Hazrath Yousufuddin and others …RESPONDENT(S) THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.5665 of 2009 ORDER:
The respondent filed O.S.No.54 of 2009 before the A.P. State Wakf Tribunal, Hyderabad, against the respondent Nos.2 and 3 and the petitioner herein (second defendant) for the relief of recovery of possession of the suit schedule property. The petitioner filed I.A.No.292 of 2009 under Rule 11 of Order VII of C.P.C. with a prayer to reject the plaint. The I.A. was dismissed by the Tribunal through order dated 05.10.2009. Hence, this revision.
Heard Sri T.V.Rajeevan, learned counsel for petitioner, and Sri Nazir Ahmed Khan, learned counsel for the 1st respondent.
Rule 11 of Order VII of C.P.C. contains a list of circumstances under which a plaint can be rejected. It is only when one of the ingredients is satisfied that the trial Court can consider the feasibility of rejecting the plaint.
In the affidavit filed in support of the I.A., the petitioner mentioned certain reasons, which do not at all fall into the grounds stipulated in Rule 11 of Order VII. The plea is mostly about the character of the property, absence of cause of action, etc. It is urged that the case falls into clause (d) of Rule 11 of Order VII. Even to apply that clause, it must be evident from the plaint itself that the Court lacks jurisdiction. Such is not the case here.
Hence, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.
L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J 29th June 2010 CVRK