( 1 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 4178/2009 (Jagdish S. Karwa and others -vs- Bank of Baroda and one another) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATED : DECEMBER 7, 2009. Heard Advocate Shri Dave for petitioners, who states that petitioners being tenant cannot be asked to surrender tenancy rights and vacate tenanted premises because of action taken by respondent No.1 against premises of respondent No.2 under Sec.13 (2) read with Sec.13 (4) of Securitization And Reconstruction of Financial Assets And Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (Securitization Act). He, therefore, contends that impugned order dated 19/09/2009 holding that in view of Sec.34 of Securitization Act the Civil Court has no jurisdiction, is erroneous. Advocate for respondent No.1 Bank points out that while holding that it has no jurisdiction, the trial Court has also ordered that plaint be rejected. He, therefore, states that in view of provision of Sec.2 (b) of C.P.C., the rejection of plaint is also “decree” and, hence, the petitioners have to file appropriate appeal. ( 2 ) Advocate Shri Dave seeks leave to withdraw present petition with leave to file appeal before competent Court. In these circumstances, writ petition is allowed to be withdrawn with leave, as sought for. JUDGE Khunte.