C/FA/2680/2025 ORDER DATED: 14/08/2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 2680 of 2025 ============================================= GUJARAT MACHINERY PRIVATE LIMITED Versus R.P.POLY PACKS PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS. ============================================= Appearance: MR KAMLESH P VAIDANKAR(10135) for the Appellant(s) No. 1 NILU K VAIDANKAR(8382) for the Appellant(s) No. 1 MUNJAAL M BHATT(8283) for the Defendant(s) No. 1 ============================================= CORAM:HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.N.RAY Date : 14/08/2025 ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL) 1. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record, we may note that in the facts and circumstances of the instant case, the issue was about computation of limitation for filing of the suit of recovery against the defendants, where in the plaint itself, a statement was made to the effect that the defendants had made part payments on 17.01.2017 and 28.12.2017 against certain invoices for the supply of goods. 2. The submission of the learned counsel for the respondents herein / defendants is that the statement made in the plaint about the part payment made by the defendants on 28.12.2017 by certain cheques is incorrect. Page 1 of 3 C/FA/2680/2025 ORDER DATED: 14/08/2025 3. We may note that in the plaint itself, the plaintiff had mentioned that the cheque bearing No.262025 dated 28.12.2017 was drawn and issued by the defendants towards the part payment of total outstanding and the said cheque was presented by the plaintiff to its bank for clearance and the same was cleared. Subsequently, the defendants have fraudulently framed the plaintiff and having altered the amount and the date of cheque and filed a police complaint before the concerned police station as well as before the bank (SBI Overseas Branch, Kanpur). As a result of which, the plaintiff was landed in jail and got bail only after the order dated 19.04.2018 passed by this Court. 4. In these facts and circumstances of the instant case transpired from the record, we are of the considered view that the question of limitation in the present case becomes a mixed question of fact and law. 5. With these position, it was not permissible for the trial Court to reject the plaint by invoking Order VII Rule 11 (d) of the Code of Civil Procedure. The course of action for the trial Court was to frame an issue of limitation and decide the same as a preliminary issue after providing opportunity to both the parties to lead their evidences. 6. At this stage, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the respondents – defendants that a written statement has already been filed before the trial Court. Page 2 of 3 C/FA/2680/2025 ORDER DATED: 14/08/2025 7. With the above, we set aside the judgment and order dated 06.06.2025 of rejection of the plaint passed by the Commercial Court and remit the matter back for fresh consideration after framing of issues with the assistance of the learned advocates for the parties, permitting the parties to lead their evidences and then decide the issue of limitation as a preliminary issue before adverting upon any of the other issues framed. 8. With the above observations and directions, the present appeal stands disposed of. (SUNITA AGARWAL, CJ ) (D.N.RAY,J) SAHIL S. RANGER Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judges. Digitally signed by: SAHIL SAMIULLA RANGER(HC01898), PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 14/08/2025 15:49:45