JUDGMENT

Ms. Nidhi Gupta, J.

Present Revision Petition has been filed by defendant No.3 against order dated 09.11.2022 passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Rohtak in Civil Suit No.35 of 07.01.2016 titled as "Gaje Singh (since deceased) and Another v. Smt. Brahmo Devi (since deceased) and Others (Annexure P1), whereby application moved by the petitioner under Order 14, Rule 5 read with section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as "CPC"), for framing of additional issues, has been dismissed.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the plaintiffs/respondents No.1 and 2 herein, filed Civil Suit No.35 on 05.01.2016 (Annexure P-2) for declaration to the effect that the gift deed No.1013 dated 10.07.2009 is void illegal and not binding upon the rights of plaintiffs with consequential relief of permanent injunction. On notice, the petitioner and respondents No.3 to 5 herein, appeared, and filed written statement (Annexure P-3). Issues were framed vide order dated 25.05.2017, and trial commenced. However, vide application dated 18.11.2019, the defendants sought the framing of additional issues including issue regarding limitation, submitting that the abovesaid suit of the plaintiffs was barred by limitation as challenge therein was laid in 2016 to gift deed of 2009. Vide the impugned order the said application of the defendants has been dismissed. Hence, present Revision Petition.

3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that by way of present Suit, plaintiffs/respondents No.1 and 2 herein have sought declaration to the effect that gift deed No.1013 dated 10.07.2009 is void, illegal, ultra vires and the same is not binding upon the rights of plaintiffs; with consequential relief of permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering in the peaceful possession of the plaintiffs over the plots in question as fully detailed in the plaint. It is submitted that the said Suit (Annexure P2) was filed by the respondents/plaintiffs on 05.01.2016 whereby they had laid challenge to gift deed of 2009, and therefore, the said Suit was time barred. It is submitted that accordingly, the petitioner filed the present application dated 18.11.2019 (Annexure P4) under Order 14, Rule 5 CPC for framing of additional issues. It is submitted that the issue of limitation is intrinsic to the Suit between the parties and therefore, a decision upon the same is imperative for the proper adjudication of the matter.

4. It is submitted that however, proper adjudication upon the said issue can only be if parties are permitted to lead evidence in respect of the same. It is submitted that parties can lead evidence in this regard only if proper issue is framed in respect thereof. However, vide the impugned order the learned trial Court has mechanically dismissed the petitioner's application without considering the importance of the issue at hand.

5. It is submitted that during cross-examination of PW1- respondent/plaintiff No.1, he has admitted that he had knowledge of the gift deed as far back as in 2008. However, respondent/plaintiff filed the Civil Suit only in the year 2016 and therefore, on the face of it, the Suit is barred by limitation and, in the interest of justice and for proper adjudication of the matter, the petitioner ought to be permitted to raise additional issue in this regard.

6. It is further submitted that the two new issues sought to be f