(Oral) In a Civil Original Suit, instituted by the plaintiffs, respondents herein, in the Court of Sub Judge, Kulgam, against the defendants, petitioners herein, the petitioners, besides taking other pleas, also prayed for dismissal of the Suit being barred by time. The learned trial Court framed the issues and issue No. 3 read as under: "Issue No. 3: Whether Suit of Plaintiff is time barred?" 2. The learned trial Court, in terms of the impugned order, held that the Suit is not time barred and rejected the contention of the petitioners -- defendants. 3. Learned counsel for the petition­ers submitted that article 66 of the 01st Schedule of the Limitation Act is attracted in the facts of the case and the Suit was to be filed within three years from the date fraud became known to the respondents -plaintiffs. 4. In order to ascertain as to whether article 66 of 01st Schedule of the Limi­tation Act would be attracted to the facts of the case, learned counsel for the petitioners was asked to provide copy of the plaint. Perusal of the plaint did show that plea of fraud has not been taken by the respondents -- plaintiffs. This article would not be, thus, at­tracted to the facts of this case. 5. Compromise Decree was passed in the year 1998 and in sequel thereto, order on mutation was passed by the concerned revenue authorities, which order was challenged in the appeal in the year 2003. The appeal was dis­missed in the year 2005 on the ground that the order on mutation has been passed in pursuance of the Civil Court decree. The respondents -- plaintiffs, thereafter, instituted Suit in the year 2009. 6. Learned counsel for the respon­dents submitted that the Suit was not instituted before 2009 because of the fact that mother of the respondents -plaintiffs died in January, 2008. 7. The interests of the mother in the immoveable property were extin­guished in terms of the decree of 1998. The respondents-plaintiffs could not, thus, wait till the time she died. 8. The issue as to whether the Suit is time barred or not is a pure ques­tion of law but, in the facts of this case, it is a mixed question of law and facts and this issue would require to be tried and decided along with other issues. 9. 8. The issue as to whether the Suit is time barred or not is a pure ques­tion of law but, in the facts of this case, it is a mixed question of law and facts and this issue would require to be tried and decided along with other issues. 9. For the above stated reasons, the order dated 16.07.2012 passed by learned Sub Judge, Kulgam, is set aside. The learned trial Court to pro­ceed with the trial of the case and shall deal with the issue No. 3 along with other issues being an issue of mixed question of law and facts. Disposed of along with con­nected CMPs.