1 WP-8315-10.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Mhi WRIT PETITION NO. 8315 OF 2010 Shri Bhalchandra Timanna Patil & Anr. ... Petitioners Vs. Sher Mohammed Hajigul ... Respondent Mr. Amit H. Yadav,Advocate, for the petitioners. CORAM: J.H.BHATIA,J. DATE : 19th October, 2010. P.C. 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners. 2. The respondent/plaintiff filed S.C.Suit No.4118 of 2000 before the City Civil Court for possession of the suit property on which the defendants/present petitioners have allegedly made encroachment. The defendants took out Notice of Motion No.2011/2009 challenging the jurisdiction of the trial Court on several grounds. That Notice of Motion has been rejected. The suit is still pending. That order rejecting the Notice of Motion is challenged in the present petition. 3. The learned Counsel for the petitioners admits that issues areframed in the suit, recording of evidence in the suit has also commenced and when the 2 WP-8315-10.sxw trial of the suit was proceeding, the present petitioners took out Notice of Motion raising the question of jurisdiction, including the pecuniary jurisdiction. It appears that the Notice of Motion was taken out after a long period of 9 years with sole purpose of prolonging the disposal of the suit. On the ground of delay and laches on the part of the defendants/petitioners the Notice of Motion itself could have been dismissed. As the suit is about 10 years old, all the questions which may arise between the parties may be disposed of at the time of final disposal of the suit. Therefore, I am not inclined to interfere in the said order. 4. In the result, the petition stands dismissed. 5. The trial Court shall expedite the suit and dispose of the same preferably by the end of April, 2011. (J.H.BHATIA,J.)