JUDGMENT :

Bhaskar Bhattacharya, J.

This First Appeal is at the instance of the plaintiffs in a suit inter alia for recovery of possession of immovable property, injunction in respect of publications and religious gathering and for appointment of Court Commissioner for taking accounts etc., as mentioned in the plaint and is directed against an order dated 25th April 2012, passed by the learned 3rd Additional Senior Civil Judge, Kheda, at Nadiad, in Regular Civil Suit No. 48 of 2011 by which the learned trial Judge rejected the plaint in exercise of powers conferred under Order 7 Rule 11 (d) of the Code of Civil Procedure [the Code, hereafter] on the ground that the same was barred by the provisions of section 50 of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 [the Trusts Act, hereafter] for having filed without obtaining the permission in writing of the Charity Commissioner.

1.1 The Civil Application is filed by the appellants for substituted service. Since the defendant No. 2 whose application for rejection of the plaint has been allowed has already appeared through Mr Thakore, learned Senior Advocate with Mr. Majmudar, we dispense with the service of notice upon the other defendants and thus, the said Civil Application has become in-fructuous.

1.2 The Cross Objection has been filed by the respondent No. 1 inter alia supporting the impugned order but attacking the adverse findings of the learned trial Judge on the question of limitation and also on the other issues decided against the said respondent.

2. The following facts are not in dispute.

2.1 In the suit filed by the plaintiffs, they prayed for the following relief’s:

"[A] Be pleased to pass order and decree in favour of the plaintiffs and against the defendants by directing them to vacate the possession over the suit property as described in the Para No. 16 of this petition and hand over the possession of the same to us the plaintiffs.

[B] Be pleased to pass the stay order directing the defendant/s not to make publication of 'Nirnay' Panchang from Raghuvir Vadi under the name of Vadtal Temple Pithsthan. Be pleased to pass permanent stay order against the defendants.

[C] Be pleased to pass the order staying the defendant No. 3 from granting religious credential to the women on 14.4.2011 i.e. on Chaitra Sud 11 - Samvat 2067 as per Hindu Calendar or any other day in Raghuvir Vadi or any other place.

[D] Be pleased to pass the order staying the defendants from celebrating religious and social functions in the suit property i.e. Raghuvir Vadi. Be also pleased to direct the defendants not to gather the people on religious and social occasions and events in the suit property.

[E] The defendants or the persons on behalf of the defendants have published 'Nirnay' Panchang in the name of and on behalf of Vadtal Temple. This Hon'ble Court is requested to appoint court commissioner and pass order to accumulate all the magazines/books published unauthorized way by the defendants and to destroy all the copies. Be pleased to pass order as such.

[F] By arranging religious and sacred functions/programs, the defendants have collected cash donations and gifts from the satsangis and Hari Bhaktas. Be pleased to appoint Court Commissioner and to get cleared the accounts of the income incurred by the defendants between the years from 2002 to this day. Be also pleased to pass order and decree against the defendants and direct them to hand over all such amounts as decided by the Court Commissioner, to the plaintiff Trust.

[G] Be pleased to pass such other and further relief which may deem fit and proper by this Hon'ble Court on the basis of the facts of this petition.

[H] Be pleased to direct the defendants to pay the costs and expenses of this petition, to us the plaintiffs."

2.2 After entering appearance in the suit, the defendant No. 2 filed an application under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code thereby contending that the suit was barred by limitation inasmuch as the cause of action had accrued on 11th May 2002 whereas th