Venkatasrinath (Job) 24 July 2024

Declaration suit - bare declaration vs consequential relief is must

Case Details -

In Lower court Bare Declaration suit was filed against brother by his sister

asking to declare the registered gift settlement deed done by father as null and void

due to un due influence and cohesion

IA under O7r11b filed saying suit is under valued since declaring the deed as null and void creates

a share in the property so suit U/s 25(d) & 27(c) of TNCF & SV Act 1955 is wrong and plaintiff

must have valued the suit U/s 25(b) of TNCF & SV Act 1955 and she is not a party to the gift deed

Trail Court Judge Allowed the IA and Rejected the Plaint saying -

u/s 34 of Specific Relief act clearly reads that in the absence of any consequential relief the suit fails.

so bare declaration to setting aside a document as null and void can not sustain when she is not the exclusive owner of the suit property and hence plaint is rejected as barred by law

Plaintiff has filed an Appeal on the following grounds

1.Its wrongly dismissed since its beyond the scope of order 7 rule 11b

2.Relief claimed is correct as appellant is not a party to the said deed and she need NOT pay a higher court fees u/s 40 of TN court feed act

3.Court has failed to note that plaintiff is not hit by embarked under order 2 rule 2 of cpc and rejection of plaint is not proper under order 7 rule 11b

4.court pointing out subsequential relief at this stage is pre mature, partition suit and declaration suit are two different one

Questions-

1) whether the trail court degree - rejecting plaint since no consequential relief (only injunction asked) asked is barred by law as per sec 34 of specific relief act is correct or what appealant and plaintiff is saying is correct ?

2) any SC Judgements related to this.

Reply Follow

2 Replies

Rama chary Rachakonda (Secunderabad/Telangana state Highcourt practice watsapp no.9989324294 ) 25 July 2024

You can search for a case in the Supreme Court judgments by following these steps ¹: - *Petitioner Name*: Search for judgments by the petitioner's name. - *Respondent Name*: Search for judgments by the respondent's name. - *Judge Name*: Search for judgments by the judge's name. - *Case Number*: Search for judgments by the case number. - *Text*: Search for judgments by a specific text or phrase. - *Act*: Search for judgments by a specific act. - *Held Wise*: Search for judgments by held wise. - *Date of Judgment*: Search for judgments by the date of judgment. - *Constitution Bench*: Search for judgments by the constitution bench. You can also visit the Judgment Search Portal at https://judgments.ecourts.gov.in, which allows you to search by Bench, Case Type, Case Number, and more ².

1 Like

T. Kalaiselvan, Advocate (Advocate) 25 July 2024

If an appeal is filed then the respondent has to challenge the same properly becasue it is an appeal against the orders passed in the petition filed by the respondent under Order 7 Rule 11.

The trial court has already discussed the question of law and passed an order favoring the respondent hence the respondent has to follow the same line in the appeal too.

Don't bring a new subject to the matter decided on some issues convinced by trial court because the appeal is against the aggrieved orderrs and not the new topic you are trying to introduce here which is not a subject matter and it was not a subject raised by you in the trial proceedings before the trial court..

You can search for the suitable judgments yourself

1 Like