GURUMURTHY Vs. MUTHU NARAYANAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present civil revision petition is directed against the order of the learned Principal District Munsif, Puducherry dated 6.8.2010 made in I.A.No.728 of 2010 in O.S.No.1250 of 2008.

(2.) THE plaintiffs in the above referred suit are the petitioners herein and the defendant thereon is the respondent.

(3.) IN the said suit, the respondent herein has filed an application in I.A.No.728 of 2010 for rejecting the plaint under VII Rule 11 C.P.C. The claim of the respondent in the said application was that -- (a) the suit for bare injunction is not maintainable without a prayer for declaration of title. The entire plaint all along in each and every paragraphs would only be aiming at a dispute in the title to the suit property and therefore, in such circumstances, the plaint ought to have been framed with a prayer for declaration of title and thereupon valuation ought to have been done in accordance with law on the market value of the property and court fee ought to have been paid accordingly. Therefore, the suit itself is liable to be rejected for want of a prayer for declaration and for want of payment of court fee. (b) By virtue of the provisions of Order 2 Rule 2 C.P.C., the plaint becomes one bad for want of cause of action and therefore, the petitioners herein cannot continue the suit. (c) IN paragraph 8 of the plaint, the petitioners have clearly spelled out that they are enjoying the suit property hostile to the owner. Hence, in such circumstances, the suit for bare injunction alone is not maintainable.