For applications filed by the Respondent as 'Notice to produce docs and admit facts' (quite a few of them!!!)..................... Petitioner has replied as 'No locus standi'...that's all....in just one paragraph!!!
Should the Petitioner's reply be taken as 'Objection to Application' vide ...
O7 R11 (d) (Rejection of plaint :- (d) where the suit appears from the statement in the plaint to be barred by any law;)
OR
Should the Petitioner's reply be taken as 'implicit admission/evasive denial' vide ...
O8 R3,4,5 (Evasive Denial)
O7 does have the precedence to O8.
There is catch here ................. that ... All these Respondent's apps for 'Notice to produce docs/ admit facts' are in regards to 'Review of Injuction Order passed in favour of Petitioner earlier'...
But Respondent has filed it due to change of circumstances and discovery of new facts.
In such a scenario ...
In regards to the 'say' by Petitioner ............ Will the Hon'ble Court treat it as 'preliminary objection' by the Petitioner..... and not as 'evasive denial/implicit admission to facts'?
In case, if it is treated as a 'preliminary objection' ....and if respondent manages to show that 'it did have the locus standi to file these App'......then.....................
Will the petitioner be granted additional time to respond to 'Notice to produce/admit facts'????
Or
Petitioner's 'say' in one paragraph be taken as Evasive denial in Respondent's favour?
Isn't this a delaying tactic by Petitioner? by raising merely 'locus standi' objection?
