HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 6642 of 2025 Court No. - 17 HON'BLE SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J. 1. Heard Sri Ajay Sharma, the learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the records. 2. By means of the instant petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have challenged the validity of an order dated 30.10.2018, passed by learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Kunda, District Pratapgarh in Original Suit No.06 of 2016, whereby the issue no.2 framed in the suit regarding maintainability of the suit has been decided in favour of the plaintiffs and against the defendants. 3. The petitioners had challenged the order dated 30.10.2018 by filing Civil Revision No.37 of 2018, which has been dismissed by means of a judgement and order dated 23.07.2025, passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Court No.2, Pratapgarh and the petitioners have assailed the validity of the revisional order also. 4. The trail court has mentioned the submissions advanced on behalf of the petitioners in support of the issue no.2, which is that the petitioners do not have title in respect of the property in dispute and they have no basis for filing the suit. 5. Per contra, the plaintiffs claimed that they have acquired the title by succession. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ajay Sharma, Ashish Kumar Maurya Counsel for Respondent(s) : Jogendra Prasad Pandey And Another .....Petitioner(s) Atul Kumar Shukla And Another .....Respondent(s) 6. The trial court held that the suit is maintainable. 7. The petitioners filed revision challenging the order of trial court in which they again asserted that the plaintiffs have no right, title or interest in the property in dispute and therefore the suit filed by them is not maintainable. The revisional court has held that these issues can be decided after the parties are given an opportunity to lead evidence in support of their respective cases and it cannot be said that the suit is not maintainable. 8. Challenging the aforesaid orders, the learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the suit is time barred and therefore it is not maintainable. He has placed reliance upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Nikhila Divyang Mehta and anr. Vs. Hitesh P. Sanghvi & ors.: (2025) SCC OnLine 779. 9. The impugned order decides issue no.2 which is whether the suit is maintainable and this issue has not been framed regarding the suit being time barred. Therefore, the suit being time barred is a new plea being raised before this court for the first time and it was not raised either before the trial court or before the revisional court. Moreover, whether a suit is has been filed within limitation or not is a mixed question of law and fact which can be decided after giving opportunity of hearing to the parties. 10. So far as the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court that has been relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioners is concerned, that arose from rejection of an application under Order VII, Rule 11 CPC which order was reversed by the High Court and the plaint was restored. The judgement deals with the scope of Order VII, Rule 11 CPC as per which only averments made in the plaint are to be examined for deciding as to whether the plaint should be rejected or not. In that case even as per the plaint averments the suit was barred by time, whereas neither the present plaint discloses any such fact nor did the defendants- petitioners filed any application under Order VII, Rule 11 CPC in the present case. A227 No. 6642 of 2025 2 11. The defendants have filed the written statement disputing the correctness of the pleas taken in the plaint and the correctness of the pleas will only be decided by the learned trial court after the parties have been given an opportunity of leading evidence. 12. There appears to be no error or illegality in the impugned orders warranting interference by this court in exercise of its powers of superintendence. The petition lacks merit and the same is dismissed accordingly at the admission stage. November 14, 2025 Ram. A227 No. 6642 of 2025 3 (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench