SHRI GANDHI ASHRAM DAS BHAWAN Vs. DINESH DAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.

(2.) It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the averment contained in the plaint would indicate that the suit filed by the landlord is barred by Article 113 of the Indian Limitation Act inasmuch as per own plaint averment, cause of action for filing the suit arose on 25.9.2002 on the basis of notice dated 24.8.2002, as such, the proceedings having been initiated in the year 2007 are apparently beyond the statutory period of limitation of three years as prescribed under the Indian Limitation Act, as such, the plaint ought to have been rejected under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC. It is further contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the view taken by the trial court in declining to examine the objection of the petitioner under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC on the ground of necessary issue having been framed in the suit apparently amounts to failure in exercise of jurisdiction by the trail court inasmuch as Order 7 Rule 11 CPC cast statutory duty on the court concerned to examine as to whether the suit is barred under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC and as such, the objection so raised by the petitioner ought to have been examined by the trail court as a preliminary objection inasmuch as adjudication thereof required neither of the parties to lead any evidence.

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record.