1 IN THE HIGH COURT JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION APPEAL NO.624 OF 2006 IN NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1538 OF 2005 IN SUIT NO.3835 OF 1996 AND NOTICE OF MOTION NO.2859 OF 2006 IN APPEAL NO.624 OF 2006 Mr.Ramesh Shetty. ...Appellant. Vs. 1.Suleman Valimohammed & Anr. ...Respondents. --- Mr.Behram Shroff i/b. Roshan D Souza, for Appellant. Mr.M.A.Dharamraj, for Respondents. --- CORAM: D.K.DESHMUKH & V.R.KINGAONKAR,JJ. DATED: 21st April, 2010 P.C.: 1. By this appeal,the appellant challenges the order dated 18.7.2006 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in Notice of motion no.1538 of 2 2005. By that order, the learned Single Judge has set aside the ex-parte decree dated 20.7.2004 passed by the another learned Single Judge of this Court. Perusal of the judgment of the Full Bench of this Court in the case Elphinstone Spg. And Wvg. Mills Co.Ltd., Vs. M/s.Sondi Sons (Pvt) Ltd., AIR 1962 Bombay 241 shows that an order setting aside an ex- parte decree under Order 9 Rule 13 of C.P.C. does not amount a judgment within the meaning of Clause 15 of Letters Patent, therefore, an appeal under that clause is not maintainable. The appeal is, therefore, disposed of. In view of the aforesaid order, notice of motion no.2859 of 2006 does not survive for consideration. It is disposed of. (D.K.DESHMUKH,J.) (V.R.KINGAONKAR,J.)