SURJIT KAUR GILL & ANR. versus ADARSH KAUR GILL & ANR.

SURJIT KAUR GILL & ANR. versus ADARSH KAUR GILL & ANR.

The issue of limitation being a mixed question of fact and law, the suit could not be rejected under Order 7 Rule 11 at this stage based on pleadings alone. The application for rejection of plaint under Order 7 Rule 11 was therefore wrongly allowed by the Division Bench. The suit must proceed to trial for determination of limitation and other substantive issues.

Parties
Appellant: Surjit Kaur Gill; Respondent: Adarsh Kaur Gill
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
30 January 2014
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Division Bench Judgment of Delhi High Court
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Partition, Rendition of Accounts, Limitation, Application for Rejection of Plaint Under Order 7 Rule 11

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Surjit Kaur Gill

Appellant

Adarsh Kaur Gill

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Division Bench Judgment of Delhi High Court

  1. 1 Whether the suit for partition and rendition of accounts based on a will is barred by limitation and thus liable to be rejected under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908

Ratio Decidendi

The issue of limitation being a mixed question of fact and law, the suit could not be rejected under Order 7 Rule 11 at this stage based on pleadings alone. The application for rejection of plaint under Order 7 Rule 11 was therefore wrongly allowed by the Division Bench. The suit must proceed to trial for determination of limitation and other substantive issues.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Judgment and order of the Division Bench of Delhi High Court set aside
  • Application for rejection of plaint made under Order 7 Rule 11 stands rejected