THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.217 of 2011 ORDER: 1. This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order dated 19.10.2010 passed by the II Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad in O.S.SR.No.3609 of 2010, whereunder and whereby the learned Judge rejected the plaint filed by the petitioners/plaintiffs under Order VII Rule 11(a) C.P.C only on the ground that the plaintiffs did not ask for the ancillary relief. 2. The suit is filed for declaration that plaintiff No.1 is the legally wedded wife, and plaintiff Nos.2 to 4 are the children, of late Sri T.Srinivasa Rao and consequently to declare that plaintiff Nos.1 to 4 are entitled to terminal and pensionary benefits of late Sri T.Srinivasa Rao from the department of defendant No.1. Therefore, when a consequential relief was prayed for, the question of rejecting the plaint at that stage does not arise. 3. The language of Rule 11 of Order VII C.P.C. is clear explicit and unequivocal. Once the Court finds that the case falls in one or more categories specified therein, it has no power to entertain the suit and the plaint has to be rejected. In other words, the provisions of Rule 11 are mandatory and do not leave the matter to the discretion of the Court. The trial Court rejected the suit on the ground that it does not disclose a cause of action. The question whether plaint discloses a cause of action or not should be determined on the basis of averments made in the plaint and nothing else. The averments in the plaint go to show that the plaintiffs are seeking declaration that plaintiff No.1 is the legally wedded wife and plaintiff Nos.2 to 4 are the children, of late Sri T.Srinivasa Rao. Cause of action arose when the first defendant directed the plaintiff to obtain a legal heir Certificate. Whether the plaintiffs are legal heirs or not is the issue to be decided in suit. Therefore, rejection of the plaint by the trial Court is not in accordance with law and the impugned order is liable to be set aside. 4. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the Civil Revision Petition is allowed. The trial Court is directed to number the plaint, if it is otherwise in order. There shall be no order as to costs. K.C. BHANU, J Date: 24.08.2011 va