1 46 S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.8477/2007 (Hakam Ali Khan & Anr. Vs. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited & Anr.) Date of Order :: 16th May 2008. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI Mr.N.L.Joshi, for the petitioner None present for the respondent. … Civil Suit for recovery of an amount of Rs.39,824/- has been filed by the plaintiff-respondent Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, alleging the same to be the dues in relation to the subscription of telephone No.251800. The defendants-petitioners have put the suit to contest on various grounds including the ground of limitation. The suit has been filed on 17.01.2006 and the defendants would assert that the relief claimed in relation to the demand raised by the plaintiff on 09.12.2002 is clearly barred by time. The plaintiff would submit that the disputed demand was raised in the bill pertaining to the period dated 01.11.2002 to 31.12.2002 that was issued on 08.01.2003 and the last date of depositing the amount under the said bill being 28.01.2003, the suit is within limitation. It appears that the defendants-petitioners earlier moved an application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC with the submissions that the plaint was required to be rejected for the suit being barred by law of limitation. The said application came to be rejected by the learned Trial Court on 09.04.2007 with the observations that the question of limitation could be decided only after evidence of the 2 parties. After framing of issues, the defendants-petitioners moved an application under Order XIV Rule 2 CPC with the prayer that the issue of limitation be decided as a preliminary issue. The learned Trial Court has rejected such prayer by its impugned order dated 01.11.2007 (Annex.8) with reference to the observations already made while rejecting the application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC and with further observations that the issue of limitation in this case being a mixed question of law and facts, would be determined after evidence of the parties at the time of final decision of the suit. The observations as made by the learned Trial Court in its impugned order dated 01.11.2007 remain unexceptionable. The learned Trial Court has rightly found that the issue of limitation in this case remains a question of law and facts and is required to be determined after the evidence of the parties, particularly in view of the stand as sought taken on behalf of the plaintiff. The impugned order cannot be said to be suffering from any such jurisdictional error that would result in substantial failure of justice. No case is made out for interference under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The writ petition fails and is, therefore, dismissed. (DINESH MAHESHWARI), J. s.soni