1 11 cra 571.09.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION srk CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO.571 OF 2009 Indian Valve Pvt. Ltd., & Ors ..Applicants. v/s. M/s. General Engineering ..Respondent. .... Mrs. Anjali Helekar, for the Applicant. Mr. Sachin Gite i/b Mr. M.S.Karnik for Respondent. .... CORAM : J.H.BHATIA, J. DATE : 26TH AUGUST, 2010. P.C. 1 Heard the learned counsel for the parties. The Respondent filed a suit for recovery of an amount of Rs.58,95,693/- towards the price of the goods supplied and interest thereon. The Defendant, who is the Revision Applicant, filed an Application under section 9-A of the Civil Procedure Code to raise the issue of limitation as preliminary issue. Accordingly, the trial court framed the preliminary issue about limitation and decided that the suit is 2 11 cra 571.09.doc based on the mutual open and current account and the suit is within limitation. 2 It appears that the trial court was of opinion that whether the suit is within limitation or not will have to be considered only on the basis of the pleadings of the Plaintiff and the defence could not be taken into consideration. In fact, it would not be correct, many times the defence evidence has also to be considered to find out whether the contention of the Plaintiff are correct or not and whether the suit is within limitation. The issue as to whether the suit is within limitation is not purely question of law but a mixed question of law and fact. It also needs to be noted that an Application for framing an issue to be decided as preliminary issue under section 9-A of the Civil Procedure Code, can be entertained only if objection to jurisdiction is raised at the time of hearing of an Application relating to some interim relief. In the present case, there was no application for any interim relief and therefore, section 9-A of the Civil Procedure Code has no application in the matter. As such there was no need to frame preliminary issue in this respect. The issue of limitation could be framed along-with other issues and the same could be decided at the time of trial of 3 11 cra 571.09.doc the suit on the basis of the evidence, which could be led by the parties. 3 For the aforesaid reasons, the impugned order is set aside and the trial court is directed to frame the issue on limitation alongwith other issues and to decided the same alongwith other issues after hearing the parties [ J.H.BHATIA, J. ]