VIJAY GULATI Vs. RADHIKA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order shall dispose of two preliminary issues namely (1) whether the plaint is liable to be rejected under Order VII Rule 11(a) CPC on account of lack of cause of action and (2) whether the suit is barred by limitation.

(2.) Both these issues were framed along with other issues on 6th May, 2010 and it was observed that these two issues will be treated as preliminary issues and decided without permitting the parties to adduce evidence. Although at the time, when the issues were framed, the learned counsel for the parties had agreed to this, but during the course of submissions by the learned counsel for the plaintiff, one of the arguments urged is that the question of limitation is a mixed question of law and fact and therefore this requires adducing of evidence. This plea, on the face of it, seems to be an afterthought and actuated by consideration to prolong the agony of the main contestant who happens to be a woman and is involved in matrimonial litigation with her husband, whom the plaintiff calls his friends son.

(3.) Briefly stated, the facts leading to the filing of the present suit are that the plaintiff, Vijay Gulati is claiming himself to be a leading businessman having widespread business interests both in the United Kingdom and India apart from other countries. It is alleged by him that he enjoys large social circle and is socially productive and philanthropic and he possesses excellent reputation in the society, in the country of his origin, as well as in UK where he is settled. The plaintiff is also claiming himself to be a member of the Management of International Society for Krishna Consciousness in the UK as well as, also on the Board of Management of a leading school in London.