1 ca 138-2011.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 138 OF 2011 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 6453 OF 2010 Shri Sadashiv Krishnaji Shinde & Ors ...Applicants vs. Shri George Fredrick Fernandes ...Respondent Mr.Sameer S. Tambekar for the Applicants. Mr.Chetan G. Patil for the Respondent. CORAM : B.R. GAVAI, J DATED : JANUARY 21, 2011. P.C. : 1. This is an application for restoration of the petition which came to be dismissed for want of prosecution. The application is vehemently opposed by the learned Counsel for the respondent. However, taking into consideration the grounds raised in the application, application is allowed. Petition restored to file. 2. The petition is taken up for hearing on admission. The learned Counsel appearing for the 2 ca 138-2011.sxw petitioner submits that the learned trial court has grossly erred in allowing the application filed by the applicants for framing preliminary issue and directing the parties to lead the evidence on the preliminary issues. 3 The learned trial court has given cogent reasons while allowing the application. The learned Counsel further states that after the petition was dismissed in default, the petitioner has filed his affidavit in lieu of examination-in- chief. As such, the parties are already subjected to jurisdiction. the evidence has commenced. 4 In that view of the matter, I am not inclined to entertain the petition in extra ordinary jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 5 Petition is rejected. (B.R. GAVAI, J)