ash 1 cra902.10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELATE JURISDICTION CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 902 OF 2010 Smt. Hirabai Shaniwar Jadha & Ors. .. Applicants Vs Shri Jairaj Devidas & Ors. .. Respondents -- Shri P.K. Dhakephalkar, Sr. Advocate i/by Shri S.S. Yadav for the Applicants. Shri S.G. Karandikar for Respondent Nos.1 to 13. -- CORAM ; A.S. OKA, J DATED : 9TH FEBRUARY, 2011 P.C. . The Applicants who are some of the Defendants have challenged the order dated 31st July, 2010 passed by the learned Trial Judge on an application made by the original Defendant Nos.3 to 20 at Exhibit-19. The prayer in the said application was for framing a preliminary issue regarding jurisdiction of the Trial Court. It appears that essentially Section 9A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 was invoked by the said application. 2. While rejecting the application, it appears that the Trial Court has gone into merits of the contention regarding bar of ash 2 cra902.10 jurisdiction. The only prayer in the application was for framing a preliminary issue. While deciding the application, the Court could have either declined to frame a preliminary issue or could have framed a preliminary issue. 3. It is not in dispute that now the application for interim relief pending in the suit has been already decided. Therefore, occasion for invoking Section 9A of the said Code does not arise as of today. Though no interference is called for with the impugned order, it must be clarified that by the impugned order, issue of jurisdiction has not been decided and the observations made in the impugned order shall not be construed as deciding the plea of bar of jurisdiction. If the issue of jurisdiction is raised by the Defendants in accordance with law, the same will have to be gone into in accordance with law notwithstanding the impugned order. 4. Subject to what is observed above, the Revision Application is not entertained and the same is rejected. ( A.S. OKA, J )