ORDER : Sanjeev Prakash Sharma, J. The order impugned dated 29.02.2012 is with regard to the action of the trial Court in placing the matter directly for arguments without allowing to lead evidence relating to issue No.2 which has been made a preliminary issue. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that while he has no objection in deciding the issue No.2 as a preliminary issue, the order needs to be corrected to the extent that the Trial Court ought to have allowed parties to lead evidence relating to issue No.2 and it is only thereafter the case should have been listed for arguments on the said issue. 3. Learned counsel relies on order passed by this Court in SB CWP No.9595/2012 where this Court has clarified position. He also relies on judgment reported in 2012 (4) CDR 2259 (Raj.): Harish chandra v. State of Rajasthan & Ors. whereto similar observations have been made. 4. Counsel appearing for the respondents submits that the preliminary issue No.2 which has been held to be a preliminary issue, is a pure question of law and no error can be said to have been made out by the trial Court in fixing the case directly for arguments. 5. Having heard learned counsels, this Court finds that the issue No.2 is "whether the disputed land is an agriculture land and therefore the Court does not have the jurisdiction to decide the suit". In view of the aforesaid issue framed by the trial Court, it is apparent that the question involved is a mixed question of fact and law and evidence requires to be led by both the parties before hearing arguments on the said issue with regard to nature of land. 6. In view of above, the order passed by the trial Court dated 29.02.2012 is modified to the extent of directing the trial Court to allow parties to lead evidence and thereafter decide the said issue. 7. The writ petition is allowed to the aforesaid extent. It is expected that the trial Court shall take all necessary steps to expeditiously proceed with the matter.