CR No. 1660 of 2011 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Civil Revision No. 1660 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: 10.03.2011. Karnail Singh .......Petitioner Vs. Baldev Singh & others ......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr. S.D.Bansal, Advocate for the petitioner. ..... SABINA, J. Plaintiffs have filed a suit for declaration. On 12.8.2003, following issues were framed by the trial court:- “1. Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to a decree of declaration that they are owners in possession of their respective shares as detailed in the head note of the plaint? If so, its effect? OPP 2. If issue No.1 is proved in affirmative then whether the mutation No. 48 dated 11.11.1971 is liable to be set aside being illegal, null and void? OPP 3. Whether the suit is maintainable in the present form? OPP 4. Whether the suit is liable to be dismissed being CR No. 1660 of 2011 (O&M) -2- false and frivolous? OPD 5. Relief.” It has further been stated in the order dated 12.8.2003, passed by the trial court that no other issue was pressed or claimed. Now the case is fixed for rebuttal evidence, if any and arguments on 11.3.2011. At the rebuttal stage, defendant-petitioner moved an application for framing of additional issue qua limitation. Vide the impugned order dated 19.1.2011, the said application was dismissed. Hence, the present petition by the defendant-petitioner. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, I am of the opinion that no ground for interference by this court is made out. The trial court while dismissing the application has held that as per Section 3 of Limitation Act, it was duty of the court to dismiss the suit which had not been filed within limitation. In these circumstances, non framing of issue qua limitation would not have any material impact on the case as the issue of limitation can still be considered and decided even in the absence of any specific issue in this regard. In view of the said observations made by the trial court, no interference by this court is called for as the issue qua limitation would be dealt with by the trial court while disposing of the main suit. Dismissed. (SABINA) JUDGE March 10, 2011 Gurpreet