1 WP No.3285/11 mpt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.3285 of 2011 Shamimbi Sayyed wd/o A.S. Shamimulla ... Petitioner versus State of Maharashtra and anr ... Respondents ... Mr.P.V. Dhopatkar for the petitioner. Mr.S.D. Rayrikar, AGP for respondent no.1. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J DATED : 20th June 2011 P.C. 1. This petition is directed against the order dated 9 February 2011 passed by the City Civil Court, Mumbai rejecting the motion taken out by the petitioner (original defendant no.1A) for framing of a preliminary issue under section 9A of the Code of Civil Procedure. 2. At the hearing of the writ petition, learned counsel for the petitioner fairly conceded that there was no application made by the respondents plaintiffs for any interim relief. Section 9A of the Code of Civil Procedure says that if at the hearing of any application for granting or setting aside an order granting any interim relief 2 WP No.3285/11 whether by way of a stay, injunction, appointment of receiver of otherwise made in any suit, an objection to the jurisdiction of the court to entertain such suit is taken by any of the parties to the suit, the court shall proceed to determine at the hearing of such application the issue as to the jurisdiction as a preliminary issue before granting or setting aside the order granting the interim relief. Section 9A thus comes into play only when there is any application made by a party for any interim relief. If there is no application for interim relief made by any of the parties, section 9A does not apply and preliminary issue is not required to be framed under section 9A. In the present case, since no application for any interim relief was pending before the court, application made under section 9A was misconceived. 3. No interference in the order of the trial court rejecting the application is called for. Writ Petition is rejected summarily. (D.G.KARNIK, J)