1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE WRIT JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.308 OF 2009 Shri Kamlesh A. Parmar .. Petitioner V/s. The Registrar General, High Court, Mumbai & Ors., .. Respondents Mr. V.P.Patil, for Petitioner. Mr. Girish Kulkarni, for Respondents. CORAM: V.C.DAGA & A.A.SAYED, JJ. DATED: 22nd September, 2009. P.C. 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioner. Perused petition. 2. Without going into the factual matrix, it is suffice to say that the contention of the petitioner is that the decree passed by the Civil Judge Junior Division, Thane, has been executed in the execution proceedings and the petitioner is dispossessed of the flat, possessed by him without any authority of law, though the decree was in respect of some other flat. He, thus, submits that he has been deprived of the property without any authority of law in violation of Article 300A of the Constitution of India srj/- 2 as such petition is very much maintainable under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and should be entertained. The submission made is misplaced. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Petitioner has an alternate remedy available. As such we are not inclined to entertain this petition. 4. In the result, petition is dismissed in limini with liberty to the petitioner to adopt appropriate remedy before appropriate forum. All contentions on merits are kept open. (A.A.SAYED, J.) (V.C.DAGA,J.) srj/-