1️⃣ Saleem Bhai v. State of Maharashtra
(2003) 1 SCC 557
Relevant Paras: 9, 10
📌 સિદ્ધાંત:
Order 7 Rule 11 અરજી નક્કી કરતી વખતે માત્ર plaint અને plaint સાથેના દસ્તાવેજો જ જોવાના. Written statement અથવા defence જોવાનો નહીં.
Para 9 (સારાંશ):
“The trial court can exercise the power under Order VII Rule 11 at any stage of the suit before registering the plaint or after issuing summons, but the averments in the plaint are germane and pleas taken by the defendant in the written statement would be wholly irrelevant.”
2️⃣ Popat and Kotecha Property v. State Bank of India Staff Association
(2005) 7 SCC 510
Relevant Paras: 10, 19
📌 સિદ્ધાંત:
Plaint rejection drastic power છે; slightest cause of action હોય તો reject નહીં.
Para 19 (સારાંશ):
“There cannot be any compartmentalization, dissection, segregation and inversion of the language of various paragraphs in the plaint.”
3️⃣ Balasaria Construction (P) Ltd. v. Hanuman Seva Trust
(2006) 5 SCC 658
Relevant Para: 8
📌 સિદ્ધાંત:
Limitation mixed question of law and fact હોય તો Order 7 Rule 11 હેઠળ reject નહીં.
Para 8 (સારાંશ):
“Question of limitation is a mixed question of law and fact. Ex facie on the face of the plaint, if it does not appear to be barred, Order VII Rule 11(d) cannot be invoked.”
4️⃣ Rathnavathi v. Kavita Ganashamdas
(2015) 5 SCC 223
Relevant Paras: 30–32
📌 સિદ્ધાંત:
Article 54 – limitation ગણતરી “date fixed for performance” અથવા “date of refusal” પરથી.
Para 30 (સારાંશ):
“In a suit for specific performance, limitation begins to run from the date fixed for performance or when the plaintiff has notice of refusal.”
5️⃣ N.P. Thirugnanam v. Dr. R. Jagan Mohan Rao
(1995) 5 SCC 115
Relevant Para: 5
📌 સિદ્ધાંત:
Readiness & willingness સતત સાબિત કરવું પડે; પરંતુ તે પુરાવાનો પ્રશ્ન છે.
6️⃣ Dahiben v. Arvindbhai Kalyanji Bhanusali
(2020) 7 SCC 366
Relevant Paras: 23–24
📌 સિદ્ધાંત:
જો plaint પરથી સ્પષ્ટ limitation દેખાય તો reject કરી શકાય.
પરંતુ વિવાદિત પ્રશ્ન હોય તો trial જરૂરી.