: 1 : IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SUIT NO.4313 of 2000 SUIT NO.4313 of 2000 SUIT NO.4313 of 2000 Ishwarlal Pitambardas Barot .. Plaintiff. Versus Ramanlal Varajlal Barot .. Defendant. Ms.Dhwani Mehta i/b.M.Dhruva & Co. for plaintiff. None for the defendant. CORAM : R.Y. GANOO, J. CORAM : R.Y. GANOO, J. CORAM : R.Y. GANOO, J. DATE : 2nd September, 2008. DATE : 2nd September, 2008. DATE : 2nd September, 2008. P.C. :- P.C. :- P.C. :- 1. This suit is filed by the plaintiff for a declaration that defendant has no right in regard to the suit premises, more particularly, set out in prayer clause (a). By prayer clause (b), plaintiff wants that the possession of the suit premises be handed over to the plaintiff. The plaint is drafted to show that the defendant was put in possession of the suit flat without consideration and relevant averment is found in paragraph : 2 : 4 of the plaint where the plaintiff has used the word "ex-gratia". This will go to show that the defendant was inducted as the gratuitous licensee. In view of the judgement of this court in the case of Prabhudas Damodar Prabhudas Damodar Prabhudas Damodar Kotecha & Anr. v/s. Manharbala Jerom Damodar & Ors. Kotecha & Anr. v/s. Manharbala Jerom Damodar & Ors. Kotecha & Anr. v/s. Manharbala Jerom Damodar & Ors. reported in 2007(5) Bom.C.R.1, reported in 2007(5) Bom.C.R.1, reported in 2007(5) Bom.C.R.1, if a suit is filed against a gratuitous licensee to recover the possession of the suit premises, this court shall have no jurisdiction to try and entertain the suit. 2. In view of the position quoted above, this court shall have no jurisdiction to try and entertain this suit and the plaint will have to be returned to the plaintiff for filing it to the appropriate court. Learned Advocate for the plaintiff states that no interim relief is running against the defendant. 3. For the reasons mentioned aforesaid, I pass the following order :- i) In view of the judgement in the case of Prabhudas Damodar Kotecha & Anr. v/s. Manharbala Prabhudas Damodar Kotecha & Anr. v/s. Manharbala Prabhudas Damodar Kotecha & Anr. v/s. Manharbala Jerom Damodar & Ors. reported in 2007(5) Jerom Damodar & Ors. reported in 2007(5) Jerom Damodar & Ors. reported in 2007(5) Bom.C.R.1, Bom.C.R.1, Bom.C.R.1, this court shall have no jurisdiction : 3 : to try and entertain the suit. ii) The plaint is hereby ordered to be returned to the plaintiff for filing it to the appropriate court. iii) 24.9.2008 is the date fixed for returning of the plaint to the plaintiff for filing it to the appropriate court. Prothonotary and Senior Master shall return the plaint to the plaintiff accordingly. 4. In view of the aforesaid order, Motion No.955 of 2008 does not survive and the same is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. (R.Y. GANOO,J.) (R.Y. GANOO,J.) (R.Y. GANOO,J.)