IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.20792 of 2011 Chandrawati Devi @ Chandrawati Kuer Versus Kameshwar Prasad Singh ---------------------------------- 02. 02.12.2011. Heard the learned senior counsel, Mr. S.S. Dwivedi on behalf of the petitioner. This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed for quashing the order dated 08.09.2011 passed by District Judge, Bhojpur at Ara in title suit No.9 of 2010 (probate) whereby the learned Court below rejected the application filed by the petitioner under Order 14 Rule 2 for deciding the question of limitation as preliminary issue. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that according to Article 137 of the Limitation Act, the probate case is barred and, therefore, the learned Court below should have rejected the plaint being barred by limitation. From perusal of the impugned order, it appears that the learned Court below has observed that the question raised by the petitioner in the present case is a mixed question of law and fact, therefore, stated that the said issue cannot be decided without the evidence. - 2 - Considering the observation made by the learned Court below, in my opinion, the Court below has rightly refused to decide the said issue as preliminary issue because the jurisdiction conferred on the Court is discretionary jurisdiction. In such view of the matter, the impugned order cannot be interfered with in exercise of supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner may press this issue at the time of final hearing of the probate case. Thus, this writ application is dismissed. Sanjeev/- (Mungeshwar Sahoo,J.)