JUDGMENT 1. - This writ petition has been filed by petitioner against order passed by Board of Revenue rejecting his revision petition. In revision petition, petitioner had challenged order dated 19.08.2006 passed by Court of Sub Divisional Officer (SDO), Kishangarhbas, by which his application under Order 7, Rule 11 CPC was dismissed. Petitioner raised an objection that such a question was not maintainable by revenue Court because land in question was urban land and therefore only regular civil Court could try and decide the suit. Revenue Board has dismissed the revision petition holding that issue whether or not this was a suit triable by civil Court or revenue Court, is a mixed question of law and fact. 2. Learned counsel submitted that there are documents to effect showing that this was not a revenue land but was an urban land and such nature of land was converted to urban land by order of the District Collector, Alwar, dated 30.03.1988. 3. Learned counsel for respondent submits that already an issue to this effect has been framed by the Court as issue No.1 whether the land is urban land and for that reason the suit is triable by civil Court. Onus of proof of that issue is on defendant who is writ petitioner herein. He submits that evidence by plaintiff respondent has been completed. Now the matter is fixed for evidence of defendant. 4. It is further argued that under Order 7, Rule 11 CPC the Court has to merely see the plaint on its face value and not to go into supposed written statement that may have been filed by defendant or any other additional document. 5. Having heard learned counsel for parties and gone through the record, I find that in so far as question whether or not suit is triable by civil Court, already an issue to that effect has been framed by Court of Sub Divisional Officer as issue No.3. It is informed that evidence of plaintiff is already complete and now the matter is fixed for evidence of defendant. In that event, the defendant may lead his evidence on issue No.3, which issue may be decided as preliminary issue by the Court. It is informed that evidence of plaintiff is already complete and now the matter is fixed for evidence of defendant. In that event, the defendant may lead his evidence on issue No.3, which issue may be decided as preliminary issue by the Court. The writ petitioner shall complete his evidence on this issue on next date and such issue shall be decided within one month thereafter, and thereafter the petitioner shall be entitled to give his evidence further, if necessity so arises, within two months. The matter then be finally decided after completion of evidence, within two months from the date of completion of evidence by the defendant. 6. With aforesaid directions, writ petition is disposed of.Petition Disposed of. *******