SHYAM SUNDER BATRA Vs. BRAHAMVEER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Govind Krishna, learned Counsel for appellants and Sri Satya Prakash, learned Counsel for respondents, on the admission of appeal. A suit for permanent injunction was filed by respondent/plaintiff alleging himself to be a tenant of defendant-appellants of the shop in dispute. It was alleged that as they refused to accept rent on 30.6.2013 and thereafter threatened to forcibly dispossess the plaintiff-respondents, the above suit was filed. During the pendency of the suit, a written statement and an application under Order VII, Rule 11(a) of the Code of Civil Procedure was filed alleging that as defendant-appellants have executed a registered sale-deed dated 14.6.2013 in favour of one Smt. Usha Khullar, cause of action, if any, has come to an end and the plaint is liable to be rejected. The Trial Court vide order dated 6.8.2013 allowed the application and rejected the plaint, which was challenged in appeal and which came to be allowed by impugned order dated 7.3.2014 by which the order of the Trial Court was set aside, and the matter was sent back to the Trial Court for decision on merits.

(2.) The sole contention on behalf of appellants is that the view taken by Lower Appellate Court is perverse as once it was brought on record that the defendants-appellants had executed a registered sale-deed dated 14.6.2013, of the shop in dispute in favour of Smt. Usha Khullar, the Court below had no other option but to reject the plaint, under Order VII, Rule 11(a).

(3.) Cause of action in a suit for permanent prohibitory injunction, is the apprehended dispossession of the plaintiffs from the defendant's. The Court has perused the averments made in the plaint (Annexure-2) and finds that in paragraph 19 thereof it has been averred that the cause of action to file the suit initially arose on 30.6.2013 when defendants-appellants, refused to accept the rent and subsequently arose on 1.7.2013, when they threatened to forcibly dispossess the plaintiffs-respondents from the shop in dispute.