District court has just dismissed a suit for specific performance of an alleged oral agreement (for construction of building under Ratio Deal) on legal ground that the plaintiff firm was not a registered firm (Sec 69 of Partnership Act) as well as on facts that there was no concluded contract to be enforced by the court. Sec 14 with de facto bar on construction contracts was also mentioned.
Plaintiff knew about eventual dismissal but still filed the suit only to make it difficult to sell my land due to operation of doctrine of lis pendens. Hence, he is likely to file an appeal for the same reason. To his benefit, MP High Court is likely to keep such appeal pending for 12 years!
Question is how to prevent this appeal? Is there any way to seek court's dismissal of the appeal ab initio on the ground that unregistered firm, when not entitled to file suit, is not entitled to file in such suit, which is only extention of the initial suit itself? Is there any case law to support this argument? Kindly advise.
There should also be some method of prompt dismissal of suits where it can be easily proven without having to go through the entire trial process (which takes 5 to 10 yrs given the delay tactics employed by the plaintiff in such matters), that the suit has no chance to succeed. For instance, alleged oral agreement for sale of land for specific performance. Evidence Act bars evidence of an oral evidence which is required to be in writing by law, and Agreement for sale of property is required to be Stamped and Registered, means, required to be in writing. Since court cannot take evidence of such oral agreement, the suit cannot succed. Still, trial goes on.
Likewise, plaintiff doesn't prove his capacity to perform. In such cases also, there should be method of getting suit dismissed without defence evidence, final arguments etc because in absence of proof of plaintiff;s capacity for pay for the land under such suit, suit cannot succeed.
Thank you very much.