1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.1309 OF 2008 IN NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1391 OF 2007 IN L.C.SUIT NO.1406 OF 2007 Mrs.Sudha Viren Vora ..Appellant V/s M/s.Tirupati Mahalaxmi Co-operative Housing Soc.Ltd., & Anr. ..Respondents ---- Mr. S.U.Kamdar i/by Kiran Jain & Co. for the appellant. Mrs.K.K.Soraan for the BMC Mr.Y.S.Jahagirdar i/by Gabriel Pillai for respondent no.1. ---- Coram : R.S.MOHITE,J Date : 1st September, 2009. PC 1 This is an appeal filed by the original plaintiff against the dismissal of his Notice of Motion. The impugned order is passed on 6.11.2008. It appears that on the same day the trial Court has framed an issue under Section 9-A. It is agreed by both Counsels that such a procedure is not legally permissible in view of the Division Bench Judgment of this Court in the case of Meher Singh Vs. Deepak Sawhny & another reported in 1999(1) Bom.C.R. 107. In these circumstances, the impugned judgment and order is set aside and the matter is remanded for fresh decision on the motion to be taken after the issue under Section 9-A is decided. The trial Court is directed to decide the issue relating to jurisdiction 2 expeditiously and in any case within six months. Appeal disposed off. The issue of enhancement of the amount required to be paid by the plaintiff to defendant no.1 is left open and may be decided by the trial Court on its merits in case defendant no.1 applies. It is made clear that the interim relief operating during the pendency of Notice of Motion will continue to operate subject to any enhancement which may be permitted by the trial Court. (R.S.MOHITE,J) 3