1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Civil Revision No.03 of 2026 Date of Decision : 08.01.2026 Dropati Devi and others …… Petitioners Versus Jai Ram ……Respondent Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Bipin Chander Negi, Judge Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioners : Mr. H.S. Rangra, Advocate. For the respondent : Nemo. Bipin Chander Negi, Judge (oral) The present petition has been filed by the petitioners, aggrieved by impugned order dated 29.11.2025, passed by Civil Judge, Karsog, District Mandi, whereby, an application filed by the petitioner under Order 7 Rule 11, has been rejected. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, perused the documents, impugned order and the application filed under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Civil Procedure Code along-with reply filed thereto. 3. At the stage of examination of an application under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Civil Procedure Code, it is well settled that only plaint and documents appended thereto need to be seen. 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 4. The sole contention raised in the application filed under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Civil Procedure is that the plaint does not disclose a cause of action. 5. In my considered view, on a reading of the plaint appended along-with the present petition at Annexure P-1, it is evident that the plaint does disclose a cause of action. Hence, the impugned order calls for no interference. 6. In view of above, the present petition is dismissed, so also, pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. (Bipin Chander Negi) January 08, 2026 (KS) Judge