1 HN, J C.R.P.No.500_2020 APHC010074352020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] WEDNESDAY,THE FOURTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 500/2020 Between: 1. BALINENI VENUGOPALA REDDY, S/O. VENKATESWARA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, R/O. D. NO. 7-15-20, LAWYERPET EXTENSION, ONGOLE, PRAKASHAM DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND 1. BALINENI SUBBA REDDY, S/o. Veera Reddy, aged about 61 years, R/o. D. No. 7-1203/2, 3rd Floor, Plot No. 201, Vasundhara Residency, Harihara Nagar, Mangamoor Road, Ongole, Prakasham District. ...RESPONDENT Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India,praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed herein,the High Court may be pleased topleased to set aside the orders passed in I. A. No. 1114 of 2018 in O.S. No. 216 of 2018, dated 23-12-2019, on the file of the Hon'ble I Additional District Judge, Prakasham District at Ongole and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2020 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to stay all further proceedings in O.S.No.216 of 2018 on the file of the Honourable I Additional District Judge, Prakasam District at Ongole, and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. N RAVI PRASAD Counsel for the Respondent: 1. NIMMAGADDA REVATHI 2 HN, J C.R.P.No.500_2020 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 500 of 2020 ORDER: 1. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is aggrieved by the order passed in I.A.No.1114 of 2018 in O.S.No.216 of 2018. The learned counsel further submits that the I.A. was filed under Order VII Rule 11, seeking rejection of the plaint on the ground that the plaint does not disclose any cause of action and that no documents were filed to substantiate the suit claim. It is also submitted that the learned Judge has ignored the plea of limitation raised by the petitioner in the I.A. seeking rejection of the plaint. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that the settlement between the petitioner and the respondent was admitted in the plaint. However, the suit was filed without any substantiating documents, except the certified copy of the cheque, the cheque returned memo, the legal notice, and the proceedings before the sole arbitrator, apart from the copy of C.C.No.203 of 2016 on the file of the II Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Ongole, which is now renumbered as C.C.No.189 of 2017 on the file of Excise Court, Ongole. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that when the plaint does not disclose any cause of action, the learned Judge ought to have rejected the plaint. It is also submitted that the suit was admittedly filed beyond the period of limitation and that the same was not considered by the learned Judge before dismissing the I.A. 3 HN, J C.R.P.No.500_2020 4. On the contrary, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent submits that the learned Judge has passed a well-reasoned and well- considered order and submits that limitation is a mixed question of fact and law, which can be established only after a full-fledged trial. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent, and perused the order passed by the learned Judge. 6. The grounds raised by the petitioner for seeking rejection of the plaint could not have been considered by the learned Judge at the stage of the I.A. Admittedly, and as it is settled law, limitation is a mixed question of fact and law. Therefore, the evidence would have to be adduced, and the petitioner would have to establish that the suit was filed beyond the period of limitation before the trial Court. 7. On these considerations, this Court finds that the order passed by the learned Judge is well-reasoned and well-considered and does not deserve any interference. Accordingly, the present Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N Date:04.02.2026 NKA 4 HN, J C.R.P.No.500_2020 129 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 500 of 2020 Date: 04.02.2026 NKA