1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.813 OF 2009 IN WRIT PETITION NO.8635 OF 2003 Charan Trimbal Patil & Another ..Petitioners. Versus Mongiben Hiralal Patel & Others ..Respondents. Shri I.M. Vora i/by Bipin Joshi for the petitioners. Shri J.S. Kini for the respondents. CORAM : J.P. DEVADHAR, J. DATE : 14TH JULY, 2009 P.C. : 1. In Writ Petition No.8635 of 2003, a self-operative order was passed on 22-06-2007, whereby the petitioner was directed to remove all office objections within the time stipulated therein, failing which the petition shall stand dismissed. Admittedly, the Petitioner has not removed the objections and accordingly the Petition stood dismissed. 2. The present civil application is taken out on 18-3-2009 for setting aside the self-operative order passed on 22-6-2007. The respondents have opposed the application by filing a detailed reply. 2 3. It is contended that the advocate for the petitioner was unaware of the dismissal of the petition and he was concentrating on the suit pending before the Bombay City Civil Court at Bombay. Ultimately, the advocate who was handling the above matter, has given his no objection on 25-2-2009 to enable the petitioners to engage the services of some other advocate. In these circumstances, it is submitted that the impugned order be set aside and the petition be restored to the file. 4. It is pertinent to note that the present writ petition was filed challenging the order passed by the City Civil Court declining to frame a preliminary issue. Whether, a preliminary issue is required to be framed or not is a discretion left to the trial Court in the facts of each case. In the present case, apart from the discretion exercised by the trial Court, admittedly, the trial has commenced since February 2009 and the petitioners have participated in the trial before the City Civil Court. Moreover, in the present civil application, no explanation is given for the inordinate delay in seeking restoration of the writ petition, dismissed in the year 2007. In any event, no prejudice would be caused to the petitioners, since the trial has already commenced. 5. In this view of the matter, the civil application is dismissed with no order as to costs. (J.P. Devadhar, J.)