Citation: John Mathew v. Santha Paul & Ors., 2026 INSC 1020
SC: A court cannot break a specific issue (like limitation) out to be tried as a preliminary issue once a full trial on all issues has already started and evidence has already been presented. Because the trial in this property dispute had already progressed past the plaintiff’s evidence stage before an application to try limitation as a preliminary issue was filed, the Supreme Court set aside the lower courts’ rulings and sent the case back to the Trial Court to finish the trial on its merits within three months.
Under Order XIV Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, a court loses the power to sever an issue and try it as a preliminary issue once the trial on all issues has already commenced and evidence has begun; therefore, a mixed question of fact and law cannot be extracted for a preliminary hearing at an advanced stage of the trial, and all framed issues must instead be tried together.
In 2005, a plaintiff executed a General Power of Attorney (GPA) allowing an agent to manage his agricultural land, but later discovered that the agent had sold the property to a second defendant. Arguing that the sale was unauthorized, fraudulent, and void, the plaintiff filed a civil suit in 2013 seeking to declare the sale deed void and to recover possession of the property.
After all issues were framed and the trial had progressed to the point where the plaintiff had finished presenting his evidence, the defendants applied to have the issue of limitation tried as a preliminary issue. The lower courts dismissed the suit as barred by limitation. However, the Supreme Court ruled that a preliminary trial on limitation is no longer permissible once the general trial and presentation of evidence have already begun, sending the case back to the trial court for a decision on the merits.
