Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.

2. Heard finally by consent.

3. This writ petition challenges the order dated 9/6/2015 passed in Special Civil Suit no.10/2013/A by the Senior Civil Judge, Ponda, thereby rejecting the application of the defendants, who are the petitioners filed under the provisions of Order 7 Rule 11 of Code of Civil Procedure. The application was filed by the petitioner under Order 7 Rule 11 (d) C.P.C seeking rejection of the plaint on the ground that the averments made in the plaint, show that the suit was barred by law of limitation. Learned Civil Judge, after hearing both sides, rejected the application holding that the averments in the plaint apparently disclosed that the cause of action had arisen from failure of the petitioners to perform their part of the obligations contained in the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) dated 28/4/2009 entered between the petitioners on one hand and the respondent on the other hand and so law of limitation will operate differently. The learned Civil Judge was also of the opinion that the issue involved was a mixed question of facts and law which could be decided only after the trial of the suit was over.

4.