Jagdish C.Bhojani v. S.Sabarigirish

ORDER This civil revision petition has been filed, challenging the impugned order dated 19.02.2026 passed by the I Additional District Court, Coimbatore in I.A. No.1 of 2024 in O.S. No.739 of 2024.

¶2In the aforesaid order, the application filed by the petitioners / defendants under Order VII Rule 11 (a) & (d) read with Section 151 CPC, seeking for rejection of plaint filed in O.S. No.739 of 2024, has been dismissed.

¶3The trial court, while dismissing the application, has held that the disputes raised by the petitioners / defendants are mixed question of facts and law, which can be decided only after trial.

¶4The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the suit filed by the respondent / plaintiff is barred by the law of limitation. She would submit that eventhough such a plea was taken by the petitioners / defendants in I.A. No.1 of 2024, the trial court under the impugned order has not considered the same. She would submit that the suit was filed on 20.05.2024 and the suit promissory notes are dated 25.05.2021 and 26.05.2021.

¶5On a prima facie consideration, this Court finds that the suit has been filed within the period of three years from the date of the execution of the suit promissory notes. Though the learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the suit was not numbered on 20.05.2024 and was returned by the Registry of the court on that date and therefore, according to her, the suit has not been filed within the period of limitation.

¶6The said contention has to be rejected by this Court, as it is only the date of filing of the suit, which has to be considered for the purpose of calculating the limitation. Since the date of filing of the suit was on 20.05.2024, which is within the period of limitation from the date of execution of the suit promissory notes, this Court, on a prima facie consideration, as observed earlier, holds that the contentions of the petitioners with regard to the limitation, if at all, can be decided only after trial and not through an application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC.

¶7The trial court has rightly held in the impugned order that the dispute raised by the petitioners are all mixed question of facts and law, which can be decided only after trial. While deciding an application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC, the court will have to only look into the plaint averments and the plaint documents.

¶8As seen from the plaint averments, the suit is well within the period of limitation and it is for the petitioners / defendants to disprove the contentions of the respondent / plaintiff after letting in oral and documentary evidence in support of their defence raised in the written statement, which includes the plea of limitation.

¶9This Court does not find any infirmity in the impugned order. Accordingly, this civil revision petition is dismissed. No Costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 23-07-2026 Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes ab To The I Additional Subordinate Court, Coimbatore. ABDUL QUDDHOSE J. ab and CMP No. 17862 of 2026 23-07-2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 23-07-2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE and CMP No. 17862 of 2026 1. Jagdish C.Bhojani s/o Bhojani, Door No.12A, Ramalinga Nagar, 4th Cross, Bharathi Park Road, Coimbatore 641 011 2. Renuka J.Bhojani w/o Jagdish C.Bhojani Door No.12A, Ramalinga Nagar, 4th Cross, Bharathi Park Road, Coimbatore 641 011 Petitioner(s) Vs 1. S.Sabarigirish s/o C.R.Seshan, Door No.17, Krishna Layout, Ganapathy, Coimbatore 641 Respondent(s) PRAYER Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to allow this Civil Revision Petition by setting aside the fair and decretal order dated 19.02.2026 in IA No.1/2024 in OS No.739/2024 on the file of the I Additional Subordinate Judge, Coimbatore and consequently reject the plaint in OS No.739/2024 For Petitioner(s): Mr.M.Santhanaraman For Respondent(s): Notice dispensed with