mpt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 3225 of 2008 Puranchandra P. Punjal & Anr. .. Petitioners versus Prabhakar R. Chilka & Anr. .. Respondents ... Mr.Nitin Jamdar for the petitioners. CORAM : A.M.KHANWILKAR, J DATED : 7th August 2008 P.C.: 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. No fault can be found with the opinion recorded by the court below that Civil Miscellaneous Appeal against the order passed below Exhibit 41 and 96 dated 16th December 2005 was unavailable. Even counsel for the petitioner fairly accepts that it is the correct legal position. The only argument before this court is that in that case, the court ought to have converted the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal into regular Appeal and proceeded accordingly. This argument overlooks that no such request was made before the lower court in that behalf. In absence of request to that effect the court was not expected to suo moto convert the proceedings into Regular Appeal as is suggested. Even if the court has inherent powers under section 151 of the C.P.C, that could not be exercised by the court on its own to convert the Miscellaneous Appeal into Regular Appeal unless such request is made in writing or for that matter across the Bar and subject to hearing objection from the opposite party, if any. 3. In the circumstances, no fault can be found with the order passed by the court below. The request of the petitioner to allow to convert the Misc. Appeal into Regular Appeal "made only across the bar" before this court for the first time cannot be accepted. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed. (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J)