MP 1 CRA405_09 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 405 OF 2009 Mr. Kishor Laxman Sanas and another ... Applicants Versus Smt. Nirmala Ajit Lahoti and others ... Respondents Mr. N. P. Deshpande for Applicant. Mr. Harshad Bhadbhade for Respondents. CORAM : B.R. GAVAI, J. THURSDAY, MARCH 31, 2011 P. C. : This revision application challenges the order dated 14th July 2009 vide which the Trial Court has rejected the application filed by the present applicants for rejection of the plaint, on the ground that it is barred by the law of limitation. 2. Mr. Deshpande, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of applicants submits that if a plaint appears to be barred by any law, it is to be rejected outrightly. 3. By now, it is settled principle of law that for considering a preliminary objection like the one raised by the applicants what would be relevant is the averment made in the plaint. The learned Trial Court has specifically found that in the plaint though the plaintiffs have pleaded that the cause of action firstly arose on 30th June 1982 and thereafter on 21st March 1998, but it arose when the defendants refuse to MP 2 CRA405_09 correct the sale deeds in or around December 2007 and in February 2008. It has been found that the plaintiffs found it necessary to file the suit when some persons were wandering around their property. 4. In that view of the matter, it can clearly be seen that it cannot be ex-facie stated from the averment in the plaint that the plaint is barred by limitation. In such a case, the issue of limitation would be the mixed question of law and fact which could be decided only after the evidence is laid down on behalf of the parties. In that view of the matter no case is made out for interference. Rejected. (B.R. GAVAI, J)