1 CRA No.215/10 mpt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO.215 of 2010 Vishwanath Pandurang Thakur ... Applicant versus Mrs.Urmila Shrikrishna Ghanekar & ors. ... Respondents ... Mr.Atul Vanarse for the applicant Mr.J. Shekhar i/b M/s.J. Shekhar & Co. for the respondents CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J DATED : 24th November 2010 P.C. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and respondents. 2. The revision applicant made an application in a pending appeal before the District Court, Pune that appeal be dismissed forthwith. By the impugned order dated 2 January 2010, the learned District Judge rejected the said application. 3. Learned counsel for the revision applicant submitted that the District Court lacks inherent jurisdiction to hear and appeal and appeal should have been dismissed forthwith. Whether the District Court has a jurisdiction to entertain an appeal or not is a question which can be 2 CRA No.215/10 addressed by the District Court at the stage of hearing of the appeal. It has come to a prima facie conclusion that it has a jurisdiction and therefore declined to dismiss the appeal forthwith. 4. I see no reason to interfere in the said decision. It is only clarified that the issue regarding the jurisdiction would be decided by the District Court at the time of final hearing and without in any way being influenced by any of the observations made in the impugned order. 5. with these observations, revision application is rejected. (D.G.KARNIK, J)