1 9 S.B. CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.304/2007. The Institute of Charted Financial Analysis of India National College & Ors. Vs. Sandeep Khatri & Ors. Date of Order :: 18th February 2008. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI Mr. D.D. Chitlangi, for the petitioners. Mr. Nitin Trivedi, for the non-petitioners. .. BY THE COURT: On 15.02.2008, in response to the observations made by this Court that the present one seems to be an unnecessary and unfortunate litigation where the plaintiffs- non-petitioners, said to be pursuing their studies in PG Programme got entangled with the concerned Institution on the matter relating to the shortage of attendance leading to inquiries and debarring order as passed by the Institution, learned counsel appearing for the non-petitioners submitted that the plaintiffs-non-petitoners were seriously interested in pursuing the studies for their career and were ready to state unequivocally of not giving any further cause of complaint in future; and in confirmity with such submissions, the plaintiffs- non-petitioners have placed on record their affidavits sworn on 17.02.2008; and it is informed that such affidavits have been placed on the record of the learned trial court also. 2 So far the subject matter of this revision petition is concerned, having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having examined the impugned order dated 15.12.2007, this Court is unable to find any jurisdictional error in the said order so as to consider interference in the revisional jurisdiction under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The application as made by the petitioners-defendants under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, particularly on the submissions that by virtue of Clause 1.17 of the Student Hand Book, the jurisdiction of the Court at Bikaner was excluded, has been rejected by the learned trial court after going through the material placed on record and the said Clause in the Hand Book with the observations that the Clause was not specific and it was not clear if the Clause relates to civil disputes or administrative matters; and the said Clause was not making out ex facie a case that the cause of action has not arisen at Bikaner regarding the subject matter of the suit. The learned trial court has also rejected the contentions that the plaint does not disclose cause of action for not challenging of appellate order; and that the suit was barred because of proviso to Section 34 of the Specific Relief Act with the observations that the plaintiffs are entitled to maintain civil litigation on the complaint of infringement of their civil rights and it cannot be said at this stage that the suit was barred by law. 3 The observations as made by the learned trial court remain justified; and it cannot be said that the trial court has committed any illegality or jurisdictional error in making such observations. The said Clause 1.17 of the Student Hand Book reads thus:- “1.17 Jurisdiction Disputes, if any, relating to INC and its activities are strictly subject to Hyderabad jurisdiction only.” In the present suit, the plaintiffs-non-petitioners who have been debarred by the defendants-petitioners from pursuing their studies further for a year (which the plaintiffs maintain to be a period even extending beyond a year), have essentially questioned the correctness, legality and propriety of the proceedings said to have been adopted by the defendants, the present petitioners. Looking at the subject matter of the litigation and the stand of the parties, it cannot be said outright that the suit is barred by any provision of law. Apart from the ambiguous nature of the said Clause 1.17, relevant it is to point out that under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure a plaint could be rejected when it does not disclose a cause of action or where the suit appears to be barred by any law from a statement made in the paint and of course, for other reasons regarding valuation etc. with 4 which we are not concerned in this case. Upon a reading of the present plaint, it cannot be said that it does not disclose cause of action nor it appears to be barred by any law. The submission regarding the said Clause 1.17 and the operation and effect of the proviso to Section 34 of the Specific Relief Act, in the circumstances of this case, could only be considered, as rightly observed by the learned trial court, during the course of trial. In any case, the plaint could not have been rejected and the learned trial court has, therefore, rightly rejected the application as made by the defendants, the present petitioners; and this revision petition is required to be dismissed. As a result of the discussion aforesaid, this revision petition fails and is dismissed; and the interim order dated 19.12.2007 stands vacated. It has been pointed out during the course of submissions that the next examinations are to be held from 22nd inst. It is pointed out that the learned trial court has kept consideration of the application for temporary injunction as made by the plaintiffs-non-petitioners in abeyance because of the interim order granted in this revision petition earlier. In the interest of justice, it is expected of the learned trial court to take up consideration of the application for temporary injunction at the earliest possible and for the purpose, the parties may appear before the trial court on 20.02.2008. 5 It may also be observed that during the course of submissions, learned counsel for the plaintiffs-non-petitioners stated an apprehension that submission of the affidavits by the plaintiffs-non-petitioners might be taken to be a circumstance against them as if they had conceded on having committed some mistake. The apprehension as stated is wholly unfounded. The affidavits, taken in right earnest, only indicate the plaintiffs- non-petitioners being bona fide interested in pursing their studies and such circumstance might be taken taken into consideration by the learned trial court, of course, in accordance with law. A copy of this order be sent to the learned trial court immediately. (DINESH MAHESHWARI), J. Mohan/