THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED CRP No.3676 OF 2010 ORDER: This civil revision petition is filed against the order dated 27-7-2010 passed in IA No.286 of 2010 in HMOP No.234 of 2009 by the Senior Civil Judge, Narasaraopeta, Guntur District. 2. The petitioner herein is the legally wedded wife of the respondent. The respondent filed the above HMOP seeking divorce on the ground of desertion by his wife under Section 13 (i) (ia) and (ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The petitioner-wife filed the present IA under Order 7, Rule 11, r/w. Section 151 CPC to reject the plaint filed by the respondent for want of cause of action in the interest of justice. 3. The trial Court by the impugned order dismissed the said IA on the ground that unless and until detailed enquiry is conducted the allegation of the petitioner that there was no cause of action cannot be gone into. Hence, this civil revision petition by the wife. 4. When the matter came up for hearing on 12-11-2010, this Court felt that an attempt be made to reconcile the parties to lead a happy matrimonial life and therefore required the presence of the parties in person before the Court and accordingly the parties were examined in the chambers. Both the petitioner and respondent were heard singly and jointly. The respondent- husband was not willing to live with his wife-petitioner whereas the petitioner still wants to live with her husband. 5. Coming the facts of the case, cause of action is a bundle of facts. Whether there are cordial and cardinal relationship between the parties as alleged by the petitioner and therefore there is no question desertion by her or whether the petitioner deserted the respondent, as alleged by the respondent are all questions of fact which shall have to be gone into by the Court to know who is at fault and is there any chance of re-union of the parties, as the petitioner-wife is willing to join her husband. 6. If a plaint is rejected at the threshold, the very forum of redressal gets closed, almost once for all. Therefore, strong circumstances, as provided for under Rule 11 of Order 7 CPC must be found existing, before the plaint is rejected. In the instant case, there is not even a finding or view expressed by the Court that there is no cause of action for the respondent to file the suit. No provision of law is cited that bars the initiation of the HMOP. The mere fact that there is every likelihood of the relief claimed by the respondent being not allowed, cannot be a ground for rejection of the plaint. The question as to whether there was desertion or not would depend upon the nature of defence that may be offered by the petitioner during the course of trial. 7. In the circumstances, the civil revision petition fails and it is accordingly dismissed. No costs. ________________________ Ghulam Mohammed, J Dated: 21, January, 2010 Nrg.