1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.10032 OF 2009 Laxman Bhimrao Bhosale & Ors. .. Petitioners versus Bhimabai Basana Haral & Ors. .. Respondents Mr.Tanaji Mhatugde i/by Mr.S.B.Deshmukh for the petitioners. Mr.P.J.Pawar for respondent Nos.1 and 2. CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : 16th February 2010. P.C: . Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. The petitioners are the original defendants in a suit filed by the respondents. An application was made by the petitioners contending that in view of Rule 101 of Order XXI of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 the suit was not maintainable and therefore the same may be dismissed. By the impugned order, the trial Court has rejected the said application by holding that on the basis of the said provision the suit cannot be dismissed at initial stage. 2. After having heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in support of this writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, I find that no case for interference is made out. By the impugned order the contention of the petitioners based on Rule 101 of Order XXI of the said Code has not been finally rejected. In fact, the said contention could not have been raised by the petitioners 2 by filing an application. Notwithstanding the impugned order, the petitioners can raise this contention in the written statement and at appropriate stage, the trial Court is bound to deal with the said contention. 3. Subject to what is observed above, no case for interference is made out. Writ petition is rejected. (A.S.OKA,J)