Journalism of Courage
Advertisement

Telangana High Court slams ‘clever drafting,’ orders rejection of ‘stale’ civil suit

The Telangana High Court set aside a lower court's order that had previously allowed the suit to proceed, noting that 'sham litigation' should not continue.

TelanganaThe core dispute revolved around an interlocutory application filed by the petitioners (defendants in the original suit) seeking to have the original civil suit dismissed, on the ground that it was legally untenable.

The Telangana High Court recently allowed a civil revision petition and served a clear reinforcement of the legal doctrines surrounding the limitation period and the necessity of a valid cause of action for any legal proceeding.

The court held that the original suit of 2022, filed by the respondents Mohd Ismail Khan and four others, was “clearly barred by limitation”. Concluding that the suit was liable to be rejected in limine (at the very threshold), she said it failed to disclose a genuine legal claim.

In an order dated September 17, Justice Laxmi Narayana Alishetty, while setting aside an order of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Ibrahimpatnam, stated, “Mere clever drafting of the plaint creating an illusion of cause of action, which in fact does not exist, does not revive the stale claim of the plaintiffs.”

The core dispute revolved around an interlocutory application filed by the petitioners (defendants in the original suit) seeking to have the original civil suit dismissed, on the ground that it was legally untenable. The lower court, the Principal Senior Civil Judge, had previously dismissed this application, allowing the suit to proceed.

The petitioner, 22nd Century Infrastructures and Projects Pvt Ltd., had sought the high court to overturn the lower court’s order and dismiss the entire civil suit against them on the grounds that it was legally flawed because it was time-barred (barred by limitation) and lacked a genuine cause of action.

Stating that the trial court failed to properly appreciate the facts of the case and committed error in holding that the plaintiffs have shown the cause of action to bring the suit within the limitation, the judge observed that “the plaint does not disclose cause of action and therefore, the sham and bogus litigation shall not be allowed to continue and an end shall be put to it”.

The revision petition was allowed, the lower court’s order dated November 23, 2022, was set aside, and the interlocutory application petition seeking the rejection of the plaint was consequently allowed. The plaintiffs, Mohd Ismail Khan and four others, were ruled not to be entitled to seek the reliefs requested in the suit, and the matter stands closed.

From the homepage

Rahul V Pisharody is Assistant Editor with the Indian Express Online and has been reporting for IE on various news developments from Telangana since 2019. He is currently reporting on legal matters from the Telangana High Court. Rahul started his career as a journalist in 2011 with The New Indian Express and worked in different roles at the Hyderabad bureau for over 8 years. As Deputy Metro Editor, he was in charge of the Hyderabad bureau of the newspaper and coordinated with the team of city reporters, district correspondents, other centres and internet desk for over three years. A native of Palakkad in Kerala, Rahul has a Master's degree in Communication (Print and New Media) from the University of Hyderabad and a Bachelor's degree in Business Management from PSG College of Arts and Science, Coimbatore. ... Read More

Stay updated with the latest - Click here to follow us on Instagram

Tags:
  • Hyderabad telangana
Edition
Install the Express App for
a better experience
Featured
Trending Topics
News
Multimedia
Follow Us
Express ExplainedWhat sets nationwide SIR apart from Bihar’s controversial roll revision
X