In Brief
The Supreme Court upheld the principle that plaints should be rejected under Order VII Rule XI CPC when they disclose an illusory cause of action created through clever drafting. Here, plaintiffs sought to challenge multiple land deeds dating back to 1953 but deliberately omitted seeking relief against the foundational 1953 partition deed itself—a suit that would have been barred by the 61-year limitation period. The Court found this strategic omission amounted to abuse of process, as the plaintiffs were virtually attacking the partition deed while evading limitation law. The Court allowed rejection of the plaint.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.