1 WP No.5442/10 mpt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE WRIT PETITION NO.5442 of 2010 Dipti Chaudhary ... Petitioner versus Ravindra Pundalik Chaudhary ... Respondent ... Mr. S.N.Chandrachood for the petitioner. Mr.Prashant P. More for respondent. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J. DATED : 4th August 2010 P.C. 1. By this petition, petitioner challenges the order dated 26 April 2010 rejecting the petitioner’s application u/s.9A of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short “the Code”) for framing preliminary issue regarding the jurisdiction of the court. 2. Petitioner is the former wife of the respondent. Marriage between them has been dissolved was passed by the Family Court, Pune. Respondent filed a suit against the petitioner for an injunction restraining the petitioner from using her married name and/or using his name as a part of her name. In the suit, petitioner filed the written statement and thereafter made an application u/s.9A for framing a 2 WP No.5442/10 preliminary issue as to the jurisdiction of the Court. Section 9A of the Code as applicable in the State of Maharashtra reads thus:- “9-A. Where at the hearing of application relating to interim relief in a suit, objection to jurisdiction is taken, such issue to be decided by the Court as a preliminary issue – (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Code or any other law for the time being in force, if, at the hearing of any application for granting or setting aside an order granting any interim relief, whether by way of stay, injunction, appointment of a receiver or otherwise, made in any suit, on objection to the jurisdiction of the Court to entertain such a suit is taken by any of the parties to the suit, the Court shall proceed to determine at the hearing of such application the issue as to the jurisdiction as a preliminary issue before granting or setting aside the order granting the interim relief. Any such application shall be heard and disposed of by the Court as expeditiously as possible and shall not in any case be adjourned to the hearing of the suit. (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub- section (1), at the hearing of any such application, the Court may grant such interim relief as it may consider necessary, pending determination by it of the preliminary issue as to the jurisdiction.: 3 WP No.5442/10 Application u/s.9A of the Code can be made where at the hearing of the application for any interim relief, an objection to the jurisdiction of the Court is raised. Mr.Chandrachood learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the application u/s.9A was not made by the petitioner at the hearing of any application for any interim relief and no application made by respondent for any interim relief is being heard or pressed before the trial court. In my view, section 9A was not at all attracted as was no hearing of any application for any relief was contemplated. As such, the trial Court committed no error in rejecting the petitioner’s application for framing of a preliminary issue u/s.9A. Writ Petition is rejected summarily. (D.G. KARNIK,J.)