Col. Kalyan Singh Thr. His Lr vs Wimpy International Ltd. And Ors. on 29 January, 2016

26. It is an admitted position that the possession of the suit
property has since 1st December, 1988 been with the defendant
No.1. A bare perusal of the reply filed by the plaintiff to the
present application filed under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC as well as
Para 21 and prayer [b] of the present suit would show that the
plaintiff admits that the possession has all along been with
defendant No.1.
27. For this purpose, reliance has been placed on the judgment
of the Supreme Court in the case of N.V.Srinivasa Murthy vs.
Mariyamma, (2005) 5 SCC 548 (paras 10-12, 14-18), wherein
the Court had observed that the mutation proceedings in the year
1994 did not give rise to a fresh cause of action as it was only in
furtherance to the sale deed dated 5th May, 1953 and that it
appeared to have been made as a camouflage to get over the bar
of limitation. Therefore, the Court had dismissed the suit under
Order 7 Rule 11 CPC.

Source: Indian Kanoon

Leave a Reply

*