Civil Revision No.7172 of 2009 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.7172 of 2009 Date of decision : 18.3.2010 Pargat Singh and another ....Petitioners Versus Jumber Singh ...Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. D. ANAND Present: Mr. S.K.Sharma Budhladewala, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Sonia G. Singh, Advocate for respondent S. D. ANAND, J. The petitioners herein (defendants before the learned Trial Court) filed a plea under Order 7 Rule 11 C.P.C. for rejection of the plaint on an averment that “if the case is continued on basis of wrong facts it will be wastage of time of court and the parties and it will also prejudice the rights of applicants, as such present plaint at its initial stage is liable to be rejected”. The plea did not find favour with the learned Rent Controller which negatived it. The petitioners-defendants are in revision against it. In the course of the presentation before this Court, the only point urged is that the respondent-plaintiff is feuding uncle of the petitioners herein who is dragging them in one litigation after the other. It is also argued that the dispute is only about a meager piece of land i.e. four marlas of land. The provisions of order 7 Rule 11 C.P.C. do not conceptualize the rejection of the plaint in the indicated circumstances and Civil Revision No.7172 of 2009 -2- I do not find anything invalid in the impugned order. If a party, whether relation or a non relation, drags another into litigation, it is for the party proceeded against to contest it, get it negatived and, then, proceed to take recourse to whatever remedy may be available to it in the context of the filing of a false litigation. The petition is held to be denuded of merit and is ordered to be dismissed. March 18, 2010 (S. D. ANAND) Pka JUDGE