Delhi High Court
Phulgita Devi vs Krishan Kumar & Ors on 7 September, 2022
$~1
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ C.R.P.229/2018
PHULGITA DEVI ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Sajan K. Singh , Advocate.
versus
KRISHAN KMAR & ORS.
..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Vishal Bakshi with Mr. Sushant
Singh, Mr. Vikram Gupta and
Mr. Pradeep Kumar Shukla,
Advocates.
% Date of Decision: 07th September, 2022.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SHARMA
JUDGMENT
DINESH KUMAR SHARMA, J. (Oral)
CM APPL.12727/2022 (for disposal of the petition)
For the reasons stated in the application, the application is allowed.
The petition is taken up for disposal today itself.
C.R.P.229/2018
1. The present revision petition has been filed challenging the order
dated 18.07.2018, whereby, the application filed by the petitioner under
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:PALLAVI VERMA
Signing Date:12.09.2022
15:52:42
Order VII Rule 11 CPC has been dismissed. The relevant para of the order
passed by the learned Trial Court is as follows:-
"Arguments on fourth application U/o 7 Rule 11 CPC
moved on behalf of the defendant have been heard. Record
perused.
In the application, it has been pleaded by the defendant
that the present suit has been filed after allowing of
eviction petition filed by the defendant and dismissal of RC
Rev. petition no. 527/2011 and SLP (C) No. 25492/2014
filed by the plaintiff. It has been further stated that the
plaintiff has not valued the suit property for the purposes
of court fees as the value of the suit property has been
enhanced. It has been prayed that the plaint may kindly be
rejected.
In the reply, it is stated by the plaintiff that the Issue of
res judicata does not arise in the present matter. It is
stated that the decree of eviction was obtained by the
defendant against the plaintiff by playing a fraud. It has
been denied that the present suit is without any cause of
action. It has been stated that the valuation of the suit is
proper and correct. It has been prayed that the application
filed by the defendant U/o VII Rule 11 CPC may be
dismissed,
Considering the totality of the facts and
circumstances of the case, it cannot be said at this stage
that there is no cause of action against the defendant or
that the plaintiff has filed the present suit without any
cause of action. The suit is at its initial stage. I am of the
opinion that the application filed by the defendant U/o VII
Rule 11 CPC is without any merits and the same is hereby
dismissed.
Put up for replication, if any, A/D of document and
issues for 04.10.2018."
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:PALLAVI VERMA
Signing Date:12.09.2022
15:52:42
2. Learned Trial Court vide the common order has decided several
applications, including the present application under Order VII Rule 11
CPC. The reasoning in a judicial order is the lifeline of any judicial order.
The Judge while passing an order has to not only record the case of the
parties but also must give reasons for reaching to a conclusion. Orders
which are bereft of reasoning cannot be termed as good order and are liable
to be set aside in the revisional jurisdiction. In the present case, the learned
Judge while passing the order assailed herein has not given any reasoning at
all for reaching to the conclusion and therefore it cannot sustain in the eyes
of law.
3. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed. The matter is remanded
back to the learned Trial Court for disposal of the application under Order
VII Rule 11, CPC in accordance with law.
4. In view of the above, the present petition stands disposed of.
DINESH KUMAR SHARMA, J
SEPTEMBER 07, 2022
st
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:PALLAVI VERMA
Signing Date:12.09.2022
15:52:42
