TMI Blog2000 (8) TMI 1144X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... said suit, he appeared before the Court and on the second date, moved an application being exh. 34, praying that the preliminary issue be framed with regard to the question that the suit is barred by limitation. By the impugned order, the trial Court rejected the said application by concluding that issue of limitation raised by the applicant is a mixed question of law and fact and cannot be decided at this stage. 4. The aforesaid view has been assailed before this Court by the present revision application. The Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that the objection raised on behalf of the applicant could be decided on the basis of the pleadings before the Court and even assuming that it was a mixed question of fact and law, it was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... jurisdiction or barred by specific provisions of law. 6. Before considering the rival submissions, it would be appropriate to reproduce the relevant provisions that will have to be considered in this case. Section 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 reads thus : 9. Courts to try all civil suits unless barred. - The Court shall (subject to the provisions herein contained) have jurisdiction to try all suits of a civil nature excepting suits of which their cognizance is either expressly or impliedly barred. There is Maharashtra amendment to section 9 by virtue of which section 9-A has been introduced which reads thus : 9-A. Where at the hearing of application relating to interim relief in a suit, objection to jurisdiction is tak ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ether the Court could take cognizance of the suit. According to the Learned Counsel, institution of the suit would be expressly barred by virtue of the provisions in the Limitation Act, which issue goes to the jurisdiction of the Court to try and decide the suit on merits. Moreover, this aspect of the matter can be adjudicated on the basis of the pleadings before the Court; and in the given case, if it is a mixed question of law and fact, by permitting the parties to adduce the evidence in that behalf. 8. No doubt, the Learned Counsel for the respondent No. 1 has relied on the decision of the Apex Court reported in AIR 1999 SC 2089 in particular para 14 of the said decision, however, the issue examined in that case is whether the decree ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n of law, then it may be decided without recording evidence, but if it is a mixed question of law and fact, parties should be permitted to lead evidence on the facts of the case. The Division Bench has further held that the question of jurisdiction even if it is mixed question of law and fact, it is to be required to be decided first, having regard to the purport of section 9-A of the Code. In other words, the view taken by the Division Bench is that when the question of jurisdiction is raised, it is the duty of the Court to frame preliminary issue in that behalf and try and decide the same at the earliest opportunity before proceeding with the merits of the contentions raised in the suit. 9. Since the Division Bench of this Court has ta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
