IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.1693 OF 2009 M/s.B.K.Jhala & Associates ...Petitioner V/s. Mrs.Anjana Baban Satav & Ors. ...Respondents ...... Mr.Vinit Naik i/b Mr.S.R.Kulkarni for Petitioner. None for Respondents. ...... CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. MARCH 12, 2009. MARCH 12, 2009. MARCH 12, 2009. P.C. 1. Two arguments have been canvassed before this Court. 2. Firstly, that the Suit was barred by limitation. That objection has been turned down by the Trial Court on the finding that the question of limitation is a mix question of law and fact. I am in agreement with the said opinion having regard to averments in Para 14 of the Plaint. : 2 : 3. It is next argued that there was no privity of contract with the Petitioner, for which reason, it was imperative to ask for relief of specific performance. In the first place, if there is no privity of contract with the Petitioner, there can be no relief of specific performance against the Petitioner. In any case, that is a matter which will have to be addressed during the trial and appropriate relief granted as may be available to the Plaintiff, but cannot be the basis to reject the Plaint as prayed in the present application. Hence, dismissed. A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.