1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE Writ Petition No.5273 of 2005 Pune Municipal Corporation Petitioner Vs. Shri Arvind Anant Gholap Respondent Mr.R.G.Ketkar for petitioner. CORAM: B.H.MARLAPALLE,J. August 07, 2006. P.C. . Heard Mr.Ketkar, the learned counsel for the petitioner - Municipal Corporation, who had fixed the rateable value at Rs.27,500/- by its order dated 29/11/1996 and the same was challenged by the respondent by filing an appeal under Section 406 of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporations Act, 1949 before the learned Judge of the Small Causes Court at Pune and it was allowed on 27/6/2003. The Corporation, therefore, filed Civil Appeal No.488 of 2003 under Section 411 of the said Act and the appeal also has been dismissed by the learned 9th Ad-hoc Addl. Chief Judge on 21st December 2004. Mr.Ketkar, the learned counsel for the petitioner also invited my attention to the scheme of Section 413 of the Act which gives finality to the appellate order passed under Section 411 of the Act. 2 . In view of the reasons set out in the order passed by me in Writ Petition No.3334 of 2006, the petitioners have an alternative remedy of filing a civil revision application under Section 115 of CPC and, therefore, the petitioners are relegated to the said remedy. . Petition is disposed off with liberty to file a civil revision application. Should there by any issue of limitation in presented the civil revision application, if so present within a period of six weeks from today, the period of pendency of this petition shall be excluded. (B.H.MARLAPALLE,J.)