IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 17 OF 2008 MRS. MARIE CHRISTINE REBILLET ... Petitioner Versus MR. VERNON RODRIGUES AND 2 ORS., ... Respondents Mr. Anthony D'silva,Advocate for the applicant. Coram:- A. P. LAVANDE, J. Date:- 29th September, 2008 P.C. 1. Heard Mr. D'Silva, learned Counsel for the petitioner. The plaintiffs respondents filed Regular Civil Suit No.153/2007 before the Civil Judge, S.D., Mapusa seeking declaration and injunction. The petitioner filed an application under Order VII Rule 11 of C.P.C. for dismissal of the suit on the ground that the suit was barred by law. The trial Court by the impugned order dated 24.7.2008 dismissed the application holding that Order VII,Rule 11 of C.P.C.is not attracted and plaintiffs must be given opportunity to prove their case. 2. Mr. D'Silva, learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that suit filed by the plaintiffs seeking declaration without joining necessary parties, is liable to be dismissed in terms of Order I, Rule 9 of C.P.C. and, therefore, application under Order VII, Rule 11 of C.P.C. was maintainable and ought to have been allowed by the trial Court. He further submitted that in a suit for declaration, all the necessary parties have to be joined and in the absence of necessary parties, the suit is liable to be dismissed. 3. Having heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and having perused record, I find no merit in the present revision application. A suit filed seeking declaration without joining necessary parties, cannot be treated as a suit barred by law. Whether the party is a necessary party has to be decided on the basis of evidence led at the trial Court. Therefore, in my considered opinion, the trial Court has not committed any jurisdictional error warranting interference in exercise of jurisdiction under section 115 of C.P.C. No case has been made out by the petitioner for interference with the impugned order. Hence, the revision application is dismissed. A. P. LAVANDE, J. SMA