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.
Parties
Surjit Kaur Gill
Appellant
Adarsh Kaur Gill
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Division Bench Judgment of Delhi High Court
Legal Issues
- 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
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment