Civil Procedure Code, 1908
Order 7 Rule 11—Application for rejection of plaint on ground that suit does not disclose any cause of action—Suit has been filed seeking relief of partition along with other ancillary reliefs in respect of two properties—Since entire case of plaintiff in respect of first property (Khajoor Road Property) is entirely premised on the Will, no cause of action arises in favour of plaintiff in respect of such property—Admitted position that second property (Naraina Property) was owned by partnership firm, of which the two brothers of plaintiff, were the only partners—It is also admitted that second property was divided between the two brothers of plaintiff vide registered partition deed—No challenge in the present suit to the title documents in respect of the second property in favour of the two brothers of plaintiff—Only a bald averment has been made in the plaint that father of plaintiff had provided funds to the two brothers of plaintiff to purchase that property, and this fact has been admitted by the brothers of plaintiff in the partnership deed—No averment has been made in the plaint that the said property was owned by the father of the plaintiff or with regard to the existence of an HUF property or a Joint Hindu Family property—Averments with regard to the joint funds used for purchase of the property does not lead to the existence of HUF and its properties—Specific pleadings have to be made in the plaint with regard to existence and creation of an HUF, the date on which the HUF was created, whether it was created after 1956, who were and are its coparceners and karta and in the event the HUF was created after 1956, when was the property claimed to be an HUF property, put in common hotchpotch—Suit of plaintiff is also hit by bar contained in Sections 4(1) & 4(2) of the Prohibitions of Benami Property Transactions Act—Application allowed.
[Paras 8 to 16]