1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.3085 OF 2009 Ibrahimkhan Shujatkhan Age : 74 years, Occ : Business, R/o Parbhani, Tq. & Dist.Parbhani. ..Petitioner -VERSUS- 1. Abdul Wahab Haji Abdul Rahman Age : 70 years, Occ : Business, R/o Parbhani, Tq. & Dist.Parbhani. 2. Jagannath Madhavrao Chakrawar Age : 50 years, Occ : Business, R/o Vazirabad, Nanded, Tq. & Dist.Nanded. 3. Sachin Dashrathappa Shinde Age : 32 years, Occ : Agri., & Business, R/o Gadhi Park Parbhani Tq. & Dist.Parbhani. 4. Dilip Ramchandra Mane Age : 40 years, Occ : Business & Press Reporter, R/o Nanalpeth Parbhani, Tq. & Dist.Parbhani. ..Respondents ......... Mr.S.K. Chavan, Advocate for petitioner. Mr.M.M. Patil (Beedkar), Advocate for respondent no.4. ........ (CORAM : R.K. DESHPANDE,J.) DATE : 15th June, 2010. ORAL JUDGMENT : 1. This Writ Petition challenges the judgment and order dated 20.12.2004 passed by the learned Joint Civil Judge, Junior 2 Division, Parbhani in Regular Civil Suit No.13/1986. The petitioner also challenges the judgment and order dated 10.12.2008 passed by the learned Principal District Judge, Parbhani in Regular Civil Appeal No.6/2005, confirming the judgment and order passed by the trial Court. 2. Notice in this matter was issued on 29th June, 2009 and ad-interim relief was granted. However, interim relief was subsequently clarified as there is no stay to the possession. In response to the notice, Shri.M.M. Patil (Beedkar), learned counsel appears for respondent no.4. Though other respondents are served, none appears for them. 3. The decree for arrears of rent is passed in favour of the respondent no.1 and against the petitioner, for an amount of Rs.1,440/-. Regular Civil Appeal No.6/2005 filed by the present petitioner has been dismissed. Second Appeal No.183/2009 was preferred by the present petitioner, challenging the decree passed by the trial Court, which is confirmed in appeal and this Court dismissed the Second Appeal on 26.03.2009 observing that the appeal is not tenable in view of the provisions of Section 102 of the Code of Civil Procedure, being for an amount of Rs.1,440/-. Liberty was granted to the petitioner to have recourse to any other remedy 3 available in law. Hence, the instant petition has been filed. 4. Shri.S.K. Chavan, learned counsel for petitioner has raised various issues including the issue of jurisdiction of the trial Court to try and entertain the said suit. However without going into all those issues and without considering merits of questions of law, the instant writ petition is dismissed as the amount involved is of Rs.1,440/- only. It is however made clear that any observations on the question of law made in the Judgments delivered by the Courts below shall not come in the way of the petitioner in any other proceedings. 5. In the result, there is no substance in the petition and same is dismissed. No order as to costs. (R.K. DESHPANDE) JUDGE gas/wp3085.09