Delhi District Court
Som Nath & Ors. vs Hemant Kumar & Ors. on 16 April, 2013
1
IN THE COURT OF SH. JAGDISH KUMAR
JSCC/ASCJ/GUARDIAN JUDGE (East), KKD COURTS: DELHI
Suit No. 413/12
Som Nath & Ors. Versus Hemant Kumar & Ors.
ORDER
1 This order shall dispose of the application of applicant/defendant no. 1 to 3 moved U/O.7 R.11 CPC. Vide present application defendant no. 1 to 3 are seeking rejection of the plaint on the ground that it does not disclose the cause of action. The facts necessary for disposal of the application are that the plaintiff has filed the present suit for injunction praying therein that defendants be restrained from raising any illegal construction in the suit property and not to open the entrance gate illegally of the suit property in gali no. 3. The plaintiff has alleged in the plaint that defendant no. 1 to 3 on 15.09.12 has demolished their house in order to reconstruct it as multi storey building without taking sanctioned plan approved from competent authority i.e. MCD. The plaintiff stated that the defendants are threatening to reconstruct the building with the assistance of anti social elements. The residents of the gali requested the defendant Suit no. 505/10 Page 1 of 2 2 no. 1 to 3 not to construct the illegal construction and not to open the gate in band gali but defendants are threatening to them. Hence, they have filed the present suit.
2 Here in the instant application defendants no.1 to 3 stated that they are doing the construction as per sanctioned plan duly approved by the MCD.
3 I have heard the Ld. Counsel for parties and perused the record carefully.
4 It is established law that for the purpose of Order 7 R.11 CPC the averment as are made in the plaint has to be looked into. And the averment made by the plaintiff are required consideration by the court. The defence of the defendants have nothing to do with Order 7 R.11 CPC. The defence of the defendants could be looked into at appropriate stage. So, at this stage the application is having no merit. Same is dismissed.
(Announced in open Court (JAGDISH KUMAR) on 16.04.2013) JSCC/ASCJ/GJ(East) Karkardooma Courts Delhi.
Suit no. 505/10 Page 2 of 2 3 Suit no. 413/12 16.04.13 Present: Counsel for plaintiff. Counsel for defendant.
Certain documents filed by defendants no. 1 to 3. Copy supplied. Part arguments heard on application U/O.7 R.11 CPC. Ld. Counsel for plaintiff submits that he has to go to Tis Hazari Court in some urgent matter and seeks pass over till 2.00 p.m. Put up at 2.00 p.m. for further arguments.
(Jagdish Kumar) JSCC/ASCJ/G. Judge (East) 16.04.2013 At 2.10 p.m. Present: Counsel for plaintiff.
Counsel for defendant.
Arguments heard on application U/O.7 R.11 CPC. Three photographs filed by plaintiff.
Put up at 4.00 p.m. for order.
(Jagdish Kumar) JSCC/ASCJ/G. Judge (East) Suit no. 505/10 Page 3 of 2 4 16.04.2013 At 4.00 p.m. Present: Proxy counsel for plaintiff.
Proxy counsel for defendant.
Vide separate order the application of defendant U/O.7 R. 11 CPC is dismissed.
Put up on 16.05.13 for arguments on interim application.
(Jagdish Kumar) JSCC/ASCJ/G. Judge (East) 16.04.2013 Suit no. 505/10 Page 4 of 2