:1: IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION NO. 3737 OF 2009 PETITION NO. 3737 OF 2009 PETITION NO. 3737 OF 2009 AND AND AND WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION NO. 3744 OF 2009 PETITION NO. 3744 OF 2009 PETITION NO. 3744 OF 2009 Jovial Realtors Pvt. Ltd. ... Petitioner. V/s. Castex Industries. ... Respondent. Mr. P.K. Dhakephalkar i/b. M/s. N.N. Vaishnawa & Co. for the Petitioner. Mr. P.S. Dani for the Respondent. ..... CORAM CORAM CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J. : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J. : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J. 21ST 21ST 21ST APRIL 2009. APRIL 2009. APRIL 2009. P.C. P.C. P.C. : : : . Heard Mr. Dhakephalkar, learned Sr. Counsel appearing for the Petitioner and Mr. Dani, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent. With their assistance, I have perused the order under challenge. The Lower Appellate Court has allowed the application to set aside an ex-parte decree passed for possession of the Suit premises. The Application is allowed after noticing irregularities in the service of the Suit Summons. Considering the fact that the Lower Appellate Court has granted an opportunity to the Respondent to defend the claim of the Petitioner - Plaintiff for a decree in their favour for possession, I do not see any reason to interfere in the extra-ordinary/equitable and discretionary jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, more so, when substantial justice :2: has been done. 2. The apprehension of Mr. Dhakephalkar is that the decree being set aside restitution would follow. The Lower Appellate Court has not made any such direction. All that it has observed is that if at all the Respondent desires to apply for reconstruction and restoration of the Suit premises, it is at liberty to do so. I do not see how such observations would cause any prejudice to the Petitioner. As and when any application is considered by the Trial Court, it would be open for the Petitioner to urge that the premises have already been demolished after taking possession in execution of the decree and there cannot be any question of its restoration or restitution. The pleas of both sides in that behalf should be examined by the Trial Court in accordance with law and uninfluenced by the observations of the Lower Appellate Court. 3. Mr. Dani, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent states that the Respondent - Defendant will file written statement by 31st July 2009. The Trial Court to expedite the hearing of the subject suit and endeavour to dispose it off as expeditiously as possible and preferably by 31st January 2010. (S.C. (S.C. (S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J.) DHARMADHIKARI,J.) DHARMADHIKARI,J.)