Case Comment: Sathyanath Vs. Sarojamani, 2022

Drishti Meena, Unitedworld School of Law, Karnavati University

INTRODUCTION

CASE: Sathyanath & Anr. v. Sarojamini, 20221

BENCH: Justice Hemant Gupta and Justice Ramasubramanian

APPELLANT: Sathyanath & Anr.

RESPONDENT: Sarojamini

FACTS:

1. In the present case the Appellants filed suit2 against respondent, paternal aunt, claiming declaration for them to be declared as absolute owner of the suit property, to declare judgement and decree passed in 20033 as null and void and for permanent injunction restraining the defendant from disturbing the peaceful possession and enjoyment.

2. That the defendant filed an application under Order 7 Rule 11 of CPC for rejection of plaint which was dismissed4 by trial court. Thereafter, defendant filed an application to frame issues under Order 14 Rule 2(2) for following preliminary issues:

1. Whether the suit is subjected to res judicata and estoppel? 2. Whether the suit is barred by limitation? 3. Whether plaintiffs have deliberately and wantonly abused process of the court? 4. Whether the suit is valued properly and court fee paid is sufficient? 3. It is submitted that the trial court dismissed5 the above-said application. That such order was challenged in revision petition under Article 227 of Constitution of India. In the aforesaid petition HC ordered6 framing of issues of res judicata as preliminary issue.