1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.268 of 2007 Smt. Bimla Devi, wife of Shri Bhola Prasad, resident of Muhalla Kahar Toli (Lall Imli), Mahabir Asthan Lane, Patnacity, P.S. Chowk, P.O. Chowk, District Patna. …Defendant-Petitioner Versus Sri Rajeshwar Prasad Saw, son of late Ramdas Saw, resident of Mohalla Chowk Shikarpur Patnacity , P.O. & P.S.Chowk, District Patna. …Plaintiff-Opposite Party ----------- For the Petitioner : None. For the Opposite Party : None. --------- 02/ 10.07.2009 This civil revision has been filed by the sole defendant-petitioner challenging order dated 08.01.2007, by which the learned Munsif, Patnacity rejected her petition under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the `Code’ for the sake of brevity ) 2. The aforesaid suit was filed by the sole plaintiff- opposite party for a declaration that the defendant has no right to make Nala or to open doors and windows in her western wall opening towards the land of the plaintiff and also for a decree of injunction as well as for other ancillary reliefs. 3. It transpires that the sole defendant appeared in the suit and filed her pleading and whereafter the suit continued. It further transpires that much later on 30.11.2006 the defendant filed an application in the suit under the provision of Order VII Rule 11 of the Code for rejection of the plaint of the plaintiff as it did not disclose any cause of action.. The said application was contested by the plaintiff-opposite party and finally by the impugned order dated 08.01.2007 the said application filed by 2 the defendant-petitioner was rejected by the learned court below. 4. From the impugned order of the learned court below, it transpires that the learned trial court has considered the entire matter in detail and, thereafter, arrived at a finding that the plaintiff has stated about cause of action for the suit in paragraph no.14 of the plaint very clearly. A copy of the said plaint has been annexed as Annexure 1 to this civil revision and on perusal of the same it transpires that finding of the learned court below is absolutely legal and valid and the application filed by the defendant in the court below was quite frivolous. 5. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court does not find any illegality and jurisdictional error in the impugned order of the learned court below and, accordingly, this civil revision is dismissed. MPS/ ( S. N. Hussain, J. )