wp10171-10.doc 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.10171 OF 2010 Veena R. Rajdev .. Petitioner versus A to Z Industrial Premises Co-operative Society Ltd & Ors ..Respondents Mr.P.K.Dhakephalkar, Sr.Adv i/by Thodur Law Associates for the petitioner. Mr.M.G.Patil i/by N.N.Bhadrashete for respondent Nos.2(a) and 2(b). CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. 6th July 2011. P.C.: . Heard. 2 The application was made before the trial Court by the petitioners for deciding the issue of jurisdiction as a preliminary issue and by invoking section 9A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 as applicable in the State of wp10171-10.doc 2 Maharashtra. The trial Court framed that issue as a preliminary issue and after hearing both sides, the trial Court came to conclusion that the Co-operative Court has jurisdiction to entertain and try the dispute. That order of the trial Court was challenged by filing revision application to the Maharashtra State Co-operative Appellate Court which has also been dismissed on 4th July 2010. A review application therefrom has been disposed off and that is how the petitioners who are the original opponents have approached this Court in writ jurisdiction. 3 After hearing Mr.Dhakephalkar, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr.Patil appearing on behalf of the original disputants, I am of the opinion that there is no reason for interference at this stage. All that has been held is that the trial Court has jurisdiction to entertain and try the dispute. The trial will now proceed and dispute will be adjudicated and decided on merits. If the final orders in the dispute are adverse to the petitioner, then, while wp10171-10.doc 3 challenging them, the petitioner can raise all pleas on the issue of jurisdiction and needless to clarify that the same are kept open for being raised at an appropriate stage before the appropriate forum. Equally, the original opponents will have an opportunity to controvert these submissions. In the light of the fact that the orders are rendered at preliminary stage and the petitioners have still opportunity to impugn the findings and conclusions therein, there is no reason to interfere under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Petition is disposed of. No costs. (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J)