HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE T. MEENA KUMARI C.R.P. No.6029 of 2009 Date: 18.12.2009 Between: Aziz Abdul Karim Lalani and others. .... Petitioners AND M/s. Model Chit Corporation Ltd., and others ... Respondents HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE T. MEENA KUMARI C.R.P. No.6029 of 2009 ORDER: This revision petition is directed against the order of the learned V Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad made in I.A. No.168 of 2009 in O.S. No. 1841 of 2009. The petitioners are the defendants 1,3 and 4. The 1st respondent is the plaintiff and the respondent No.2 is the 2nd defendant. The 1st respondent/ plaintiff filed the suit in O.S. No. 1841 of 2009 against the petitioners/defendants for recovery of an amount of Rs. 5,45,096/- together with interest. In that suit, the petitioners filed I.A. No. 167 of 2009 under Order 7 Rule 11(d) read with Section 151 of C.P.C. seeking to reject the plaint. In the affidavit filed in support of the I.A., the petitioners pleaded that on 20.6.1998, the chit agreement was entered into between the plaintiff and the 1st defendant and when the defendants committed default in payment of the chit amount on 10.6.2000, the contract was terminated on 3rd Saturday of August, 2001. Therefore, the period of limitation to file the suit starts from the date of default of payment of first installment or from the date on which the default was committed by the defendants in payment of instalments for a period of three months. In the instant case, according to the petitioners, the 36th, 37th and 38th instalments fell due on 10.6.2000, 10.7.2000 and 10.8.2000 respectively. Therefore, the period of limitation commences from the date on which 36th instalment became due and not from the date of the alleged last payment of instalment amount and hence, the plaint is liable to be rejected on the ground that it is barred by limitation. By the impugned order, the trial Court dismissed the said application. Hence, the present revision has been filed by the petitioners-defendants. Heard the learned Counsel and perused the material available on record. In the instant case, there is a dispute between the petitioners and the 1st respondent with regard to the alleged payments of the chit amount. Admittedly, the said dispute can only be gone into by the trial Court during the course of trial. The plaint cannot be, therefore, rejected at the very threshold on the ground of limitation. Therefore, I am of the considered opinion that the order of the Court below does not suffer from any irregularity or illegality warranting interference of this Court. Hence, the revision is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. ___________________ T. MEENA KUMARI,J DATE: 18th December, 2009 pnb