Full Judgment
WP No.13486 o”
31. 08.2012 Shri A.
Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Heard on the question of admission.
The petitioner - defendant No.2 has filed this writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for quashment of the order dated 19.7.2012 passed by the 13th Civil Judge, Class-II, Parasiya in C.S.No.27-A/2012 dismissing his application filed under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC filed for dismissal of the suit of respondent Nos.1 to 6 as barred by time.
In the couRs.of arguments on asking the petitioner's counsel that the document on which the petitioner relies which has been mentioned in the impugned application of Order 7 Rule 11 has been proved on record by admissible evidence, on which he fairly conceded that the stage of evidence has not come in the matter as the impugned suit is fixed for framing the issues in the light of pleadings of the parties.
Again on asking the petitioner's counsel that without framing the issue and proving the concerning document stated in the aforesaid application how the question of rejection of suit as barred by time could be considered and adjudicated by the court, on which instead to argue further, petitioner's counsel seeks permission to withdraw this petition with liberty to raise aforesaid objection of limitation for filing the suit at the appropriate stage before the trial court in trial after framing the issues so also in accordance with the provision of Order 14 Rule 2 of the CPC.
Considering the aforesaid prayer without expressing any opinion with respect of the question involved in this petition the same is dismissed as withdrawn and not pressed by extending a liberty to the petitioner, as prayed by his counsel.
It is made clear that the trial court shall be at liberty to consider the question of limitation in the impugned suit at the appropriate stage, so also in accordance with provision of Order 14 Rule 2 of the CPC.
C c as per rules.
(U.C.Maheshwari) Judge bks