( 1 ) THE Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed as against the order passed in C. F. R. No. 63 of 2002 on the file of the Court of the Senior civil Judge, Siddipet, dated 3-4-2002. The said order is made rejecting the plaint filed, under Order VII Rule ll (d) of the Code of civil Procedure, hereinafter, in short, referred to as code for the purpose of convenience.

( 2 ) SMT. Pramada, counsel representingrespondent had raised a preliminary objection relating to the maintainability of the C. M. A. on the ground that the rejection of plaint is a decree within the meaning of section 2 (2) of the Code and hence a regular appeal alone has to be filed under Order 41 rule 1 of the Code read with Section 96 of the Code. The learned counsel had placed strong reliance on Shamsher Singh v. Rajeinder Prasad , Vaditho Anantharao Naik v. Bhoomisetty Rajaiah and Kona Ramu v. The Payakaraopeta Primary Agricultural co-operative Credit Society Limited3. Apart from the maintainability of the C. M. A. as against such an order, the learned counsel also had thoroughly taken me through the impugned order and had submitted mat in view of Article 58 of the Limitation act, 1963, the suit sh