1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT NAGPUR CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 9/2010 SUBHASH RAMKRUSHNA MAGAR & OTHERS ..vs .. AVDHUT GOVIND CHIKTE AND ANOTHER =-=-=---=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Office Notes, Office Memorandum of Coram appearances, Court's orders or directions & Registrar's orders. Court's or Judges Order =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Mr. S.C.Mehadia, Advocate, for applicant. C ORAM : Smt.R.P.SondurBaldota,J. DATED : 11th MARCH, 2010. This application is filed challenging the jurisdictional error of trial Court in passing the order dated 12th December, 2009, by which the trial Court dismissed the application filed by the applicant under Order 7 Rule 11 C.P.C for rejection of the plaint. The applicant had sought rejection of the plaint on the ground that the suit is barred by principles of res-judicata. It is contended that the main issue that would arise for consideration in the suit is pending for consideration in the proceedings before Mamlatdar in M.C.A. No. MCA 5/Pimpri/4/2004-05 under Section 5 2 of the Mamlatdar Courts Act filed by the applicant. When that application was amended pursuant to the liberty granted on 16th September, 2009, the respondent filed the instant suit only for the purpose of negating the effect of the amendment. The applicant, therefore, filed application under Order 7 Rule 11 C.P.C contending that the suit filed by the respondent would be barred by the principle of res- judicata since the issue arising in the suit is bound be to be considered by the Mamlatdar in the proceedings pending before him. The proceedings before the Mamlatdar being still pending, therefore, there is no question of application of principle of res-judicata at the moment. Besides, for a plaint to be rejected under Order 7 Rule 11 C.P.C on the ground of bar by law, there has to be a bar specifically provided under the Act and applicable at the moment of the application filed under Order 7, Rule 11 C.P.C. The application filed by the applicant, therefore, was clearly pre-mature and the trial Court has rightly dismissed the same. No interference is called for in respect of the order. Hence the present civil revision application is dismissed. JUDGE. Rvjalit