IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY: NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.1551/2011 CHAIRMAN SHRI SHIVAJI EDUCATION SOCEITY AND ANOR ..VS.. SMT. NAMUTAI GIRI AND OTHERS - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, J. D A T E : MARCH 29, 2011. Heard Shri Kalmegh, the learned counsel for the petitioners. There is nothing wrong with the order passed by the trial court on 11.1.2011, rejecting the application for rejection of the plaint, under Order 7 Rule 11(d) of the Code of Civil Procedure, as the matter was pending before the court for more than 2 years and was posted before the trial court for tendering of evidence. The trial court rightly held that the matter was posted before the court for evidence and since the issue of limitation on the basis of which the application under Order 7 Rule 11 (d) was filed, can be decided only by considering the evidence on that issue, the trial court though it fit to decide the issue of limitation along with the other issues. The trial court had disposed of the application filed by the petitioner merely with a view to cut-short the delay in recording the evidence at two stages of the proceedings, since the matter was at the stage of evidence. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed by the trial court appears to be just and proper, as the court had merely deferred the issue of limitation to a later stage by disposing of the application filed by the petitioner. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed with no order as to costs. JUDGE SMP