The determination of cause of action and limitation requires a detailed examination of facts and evidence, and cannot be decided summarily under Order VII Rule 11 CPC.

PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA, J.

1. The defendant in C.S. No. 63 of 2014 has taken out this application seeking to reject the plaint in the above suit filed by the respondent/plaintiff claiming a sum of Rs. 27,80,895/- with interest.

2. The case of the plaintiff, as narrated in the plaint, is that an offer of employment extended on 06.9.2010 by the defendant Company for the post of Manager – Customer Service (Collections) was withdrawn unilaterally on 25.9.2010 in an arbitrary and unreasonable manner. Hence, the suit has been filed claiming the above sum as compensation.

3. Though the defendant has filed the written statement denying the claim of the plaintiff, has come up with this application to reject the plaint contending that the plaint does not disclose a cause of action and the suit is barred by limitation and that the suit itself is an abuse of judicial process. The applicant/defendant further contended that the offer was given to the respondent/plaintiff on condition that the acceptance, in writing, should be given within three days from the date of offer and to join the duty on or before 20.9.2010. According to the applicant, the respondent had received the offer letter on 06.9.2010 and he had accepted the same by way of an e-mail dated 15.9.2010 which is well after the expiry of the time specified in the offer letter. Besides, the respondent had also not reported or joined the duty on or before 20.9.2010 as indicated in the offer letter. Therefore, it is contended that the offer extended to the respondent was withdrawn by the applicant Company and that there was no concluded contract between the parties. Hence, it was pleaded that there was no cause of action for the suit. It was also contended that the suit itself was barred by limitation as per Article 55 of the Limitation Act as, admittedly, the offer was withdrawn by the applicant Company on 25.9.2010, the suit ought to have been filed on or before 25.9.2013. As the suit is filed on 27.01.2014, it is barred by limitation.

4. The respondent/plaintiff filed a counter affidavit contending that the application itself is not maintainable and that the plaint cannot be rejected under Order VII Rule 11(a)(d) CPC. Since there is a cause of action and the question of limitation, being a mixed question of law and fact, cannot be tried under Order VII Rule 11 CPC. Hence, prayed for dismissal of the application.

5. Heard Ms. Nayanthika, learned counsel appearing for the applicant/defendant and Mr. C. Mohan, learned counsel for the respondent/plaintiff and perused the records.

6. The only question that has to be decided in this application is whether the plaint has to be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 CPC.

7. On the point of cause of the action, from the materials available on record, it is seen the offer of employment for the post of Manager – Customer Service (Collections) made by the applicant/defendant Company on 06.9.2010, was accepted by the respondent/ plaintiff by E-mail dated 15.9.2010. But, however, admittedly, the said offer was unilaterally withdrawn by the applicant on 25.9.2010. It is pertinent to note at this juncture that if really the three days period mentioned in the offer letter for joining was intended upon, there was no necessity for the applicant/defendant to send the letter on 25.9.2010 withdrawing the offer after the acceptance was sent on 15.9.2010, which is admittedly beyond the period specified in the letter. It is also seen that for the notices issued by the respondent/plaintiff, the applicant/defendant, for the first time, has sent a reply on 25.4.2011 stating that the offer made on 06.9.2010 was not accepted within the three days period as mentioned therein. As such, it is clear that the cause of action for the suit arose on 25.4.2011 which is the date of the reply from the applicant/defendant Company mentioning the ground for not accepting the offer by the respondent within three days, as the reason for withdrawing the offer.

8. Though t