1 W.P. 2822.2013 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 2822 OF 2009 Kakade Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. V/s Sanjay Kakade & Ors. Office Notes,Office Memoranda of Coram,appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders ................................ CORAM : S.V.GANGAPURWALA, J. DATE : 05/04/2013 Mr. J.R.Shah, Advocate holding for Mr. S.S.Gangakhedkar, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. S.V.Adwant, Advocate for Resp. No. 1. Mr. Ajay Deshpande, Advocate for Resp. No. 7. ........................... PER COURT : 1. Issue notice to the respondents, returnable in four (4) weeks i.e. 03/05/2013. Mr. Adwant, the learned counsel waives service for respondent No. 1. Mr. Deshpande, the learned counsel waives service for respondent No. 7. 2. The contention of the petitioner is that in spite of the fact that the issue of jurisdiction is framed U/s 9-A of the Code of Civil 2 W.P. 2822.2013 Procedure [ For short, ' C.P.C. ' ], the Court has proceeded to decide application [ Exh. 5 ] without deciding the issue of jurisdiction. Mr. J.R. Shah, the learned counsel for the petitioner refers to the application [ Exh. 51 ] and the order passed thereon. 3. Mr. Adwant, the learned counsel for respondent No. 1/plaintiff submits that the Court was not called upon to decide application [ Exh. 5 ], but was exercising its power U/s 9-A (2) of C.P.C. 4. On perusal of the application [ Exh. 51], so also the application dated 01/04/2013, the tenor of the applications is that application [ Exh. 5 ] be decided. 5. In view of Section 9-A (1) of C.P.C., the application [ Exh. 5 ] can not be decided dehors the issue of jurisdiction, which is already framed by the Court as preliminary issue U/s 9-A of C.P.C. 6. In light of the above, the Court until further order shall not decide application [ Exh. 5 ] finally without deciding the issue of jurisdiction. 7. It is made clear that there is no impediment for the trial Court to decide application [ Exh. 5 ] simultaneously with issue of 3 W.P. 2822.2013 jurisdiction, which is already framed. 8. If the trial Court finds it expedient and the exigency exits, then this order also would not preclude the trial Court from exercising its powers U/s 9-A (2) of C.P.C. Stand over for three (3) weeks i.e. 26/04/2013. Hamdast allowed. [ S.V.GANGAPURWALA, J. ] KNP/W.P. 2822.2013