B.K.RATHI, J. - (1.) L .A.R. No. 808 of 1998 is pending in the Court of XIth Addl. District Judge, Ghaziabad. The revisionist who is opposite party in the reference moved an application to decide the issue of limitation and regarding maintainability of the reference and whether the reference is barred by S. 137 of the Indian Limitation Act as preliminary issue the trial Court has refused to decide this issue as preliminary issue. Aggrieved by it, the present revision has been preferred.
(2.) I have heard Sri A.K. Mishra, learned counsel for the revisionist and Sri Tarun Agarwala, learned counsel for the opposite party. It has been argued by Sri A.K. Mishra that the award was given by the College on 27-7-1991. Reference in the Court was made under S. 18 of the Act in the year 1998 i.e. after seven years; that, therefore, clearly the reference is barred by time and is not maintainable. It is further contended that the request for reference under S. 18 can be made by the claimant within six weeks, but it was not made within six weeks.
(3.) IT is further contended that regarding this reference and many connected references similar question arose and, therefore writ petition No. 7360 of 2002 was filed in the High Court which has been decided on 5-3-2002 by judgment Annexure-5 to the revision that Division Bench has directed that "We, therefore, feel persuaded to the view that in case any objection regarding competence or maintainability of reference is preferred on behalf of the petitioners before the Court hearing the reference, the Court will decide such objection as a preliminary issue.";