IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 291 OF 2008 IN APPEAL AGAINST ORDDER NO.25 OF 2007. (GEMRAO MOTIRAM BORKAR... Vs. . SHYAMRAO MAHADEORAO SAYANKAR ) _______________________________________________________________________ _ Office Notes, Office Memoramda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's orders. and Registrar's Orders. ______________________________________________________________________________ Shri S.P. Hedaoo, Advocate for Applicant. Shri S.V.Sohoni, Advocate for Respondent. CORAM : R.C.CHAVAN, J. DATED : APRIL 29, 2009. 1. This application for review of order passed by this Court on 6th February, 2008 is based on the contention that while dismissing the appeal this Court had observed that there was no application under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure which was factually not correct. The learned counsel for the applicant has pointed out that there was an application at Exh.17 under Section 9 read with Order XXI Rule 101 and Order XXIII Rule 1 sub-rule (4) of the Code of Civil Procedure which raised objection to the jurisdiction of the Court to try the suit. The objection to the jurisdiction of the Court to try the suit would have to be decided by the trial Court by framing jurisdictional issue. This objection cannot be equated to prayer for rejection of the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Plaint can be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure if upon examination of the plaint it did not disclose a cause of action or where the relief was undervalued or where the plaint was insufficiently stamped or where the suit appeared from the statement in the plaint to be barred by any law. 2. The learned counsel for the plaintiff has not been able to show that the plaint in question was barred by any law. The plaint has to be examined in itself and not with reference to the defence that may be lateron taken up. Such defence would give rise to the issues which would be tried by the Court. Therefore, order dated 6th February 2008, dismissing appeal is not required to be reviewed. 3. The application is, therefore, rejected. JUDGE RR.