The son's injunction application was dismissed by the civil court and upheld by the high court. Now the suit is still pending. But once the civil court and the high court have specifically stated that the suit cannot go on even if the property is ancestral, the suit now should be dismissed.

You should move an application that the suit is not maintainable in the light of the orders passed by the civil court and the high court.

The previous application 7/11 was wrt another issue that has been decided.

- Order VII Rule 11 application is moved when the cause of action is not mentioned in the plaint

- Further , during your life time the ancestral property cannot be claimed

- Hence, you can move an application under order VII Rule 11 CPC before the court on this ground as there is not cause of action 

- Since this order indicates that if there is no cause of action , then this application cannot moved against the GPA given by your son , then the court was rightly rejected that application 

SC has held  that if no cause of action is disclosed in the plaint or if the suit is barred by limitation, the court would not permit protraction of the proceedings. In such a case, it would be necessary to put an end to the sham litigation, so further judicial time is not wasted.

 it opined that the entire purpose of conferment of such powers under O7 R 11 is to ensure that a litigation, which is meaningless, and bound to prove abortive should not be permitted to occupy the time of the courts, and exercise the mind of the respondent.

3) you can file application under order 7 Rule 11 for rejection of plaint 

You are correct. 

Order 7 Rule 11 to be used to put end to litigation since ancestor property can not be claimed during your lifetime.

Dear Sir, 

1. when both the civil court and High Court have passed an order that the suit is not maintainable, then it should be dismissed. 

2. you can file a suit in the civil court and high court praying it is not maintainable. 

3. you can also file a suit order 7 rule 11(a) to reject the plaint as it does not disclose a cause of action. 

Thank You 

• For further assistance, you can book a consultation with me. 
• If you liked my answer, please give a good rating and leave a review.

Any application for rejection of plaint under Order 7 Rule 11 can be filed only before filing of written statement. At this it is better if the suit to obtain dismissal of suit on merit. Coz against any rejection of pliant the plaintiff can again file a revision and come back in the lower Court.  There is no provision under the circumstances to obtain any short cut relief.

1. You can file an application u/o 7 r11 praying for  rejection of the plaint on the ground that the plaint does not disclose a cause of action.

2. Since the case is going on for such a long time, you can file a petition before the high Court praying for an order upon the trial court to expedite hearing f the case and dispose it of with in a fixed period of time, say next 6 months.   

Yes you can file another application under 7/11 clause a

Clause a says plaint to be rejected when there is no cause of action 

Have you filed the written statement denying the allegations and requesting the court to dismiss the suit since it is not maintainable for the reasons you have stated now.

You should have filed the application under order VII rule 11 seeking to reject the plaint itself instead of seeking rejection of  quoting the flimsy reason that the POA was not maintainable.

Probably your advocate might not have guided you properly at that time.

You may change the advocate and file an application to reject the plaint for the reason that he is not entitled to any share in the property since it is not ancestral property but it becomes your own property by inheritance from your father.

However, the court may even dismiss this application since it is filed after 8 years of the institution of the sit because you had opportunity long ago hence you cannot file the same at the stage of trial.

You may get the case dismissed by conducting the trial properly.

.

1.If the 7/11 application has been dismissed once then you cannot bring another application subsequently.

2. All  the grounds on the basis of which rejection of plaint is sought under Order 7 R 11 CPC should be included in one application itself. For every ground you cannot bring a separate application.

Application under Order 7 Rule 11 is preliminary objection to not to proceed with suit and is decided before the interim injunction application is entertained. In your case your lawyer already filed 7/11 application on a non-tenable ground and the same got dismissed. I presume that thereafter only the interim injunction application must have been rejected by the Court. Hence for your case right to file 7/11 application is exhausted. You may proceed with the suit. as the Court has already observed that the suit is not maintainable, you'll succeed in suit as well. I would be of the opinion that though the property is ancestral as per Hindu Succession Act your son can claim partition of the property based on his proportion of rights.