IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE No.10453 of 2011 ASLAM ANSARI & ANR - Petitioner/s(s) Versus GHAFOOR MIAN & ANR - Respondent/s(s) _____________ 3. 13.07.2011 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners. This writ application has been filed against the order dated 28.3.2011 passed by 4th Subordinate Judge, Bettiah in Title Suit No. 189 of 2005, whereby the learned court below rejected the application under Order 7 Rule 11 clause (d) of the Code of Civil Procedure filed by the petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the plaintiff respondent filed Title Suit No. 189 of 2005 for declaration that gift deed dated 24.3.1986 executed by Yunus Ansari in favour of the writ petitioner is illegal and void. The learned counsel further submitted that the plaintiff respondent had the knowledge about the gift deed of the year 1986 earlier and because the suit has not been filed within three years from the date of his knowledge the suit is barred by law of limitation and therefore, the plaint is liable to be rejected under Order 7 Rule 11 clause (d) C.P.C. From perusal of the impugned order it appears that the learned court below has already framed issues in this case and one of the issues is that whether the suit is barred by law of limitation. It is well settled 2 principle of law that question of limitation is mixed question of law and fact. According to Order 14 rule 2 C.P.C. the court is required to pronounce judgment on all issues which is subject to the power under Order 14 Rule 2 sub rule 2 C.P.C. Therefore, the learned court below has rightly rejected the application filed by the petitioners. Accordingly, I find no merit in this writ application and, therefore, it is dismissed. S.S. (Mungeshwar Sahoo,J.)