-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Writ Petition No.8247 of 2007 Sou.Manisha Manohar Lohar ..Petitioner vs. Shri Manohar Appa Lohar ..Respondent Shri R.V.Bansode for petitioner. Shri C.H.Keluskar for respondent. CORAM: S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J. CORAM: S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J. CORAM: S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J. 12th February, 2008 12th February, 2008 12th February, 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. The order under challenge is interlocutory and I have no doubt in my mind if the issue of territorial jurisdiction of the subject Court is raised in the pleadings, then, that issue will be framed by the Trial Court and decided along with all other issues which are relevant and germane for the proceedings under consideration. All contentions in that behalf are kept open. 2. The other apprehension of the learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner is that the Trial Court is insisting upon the presence of the minor every time the subject application is placed before it. Reliance is placed uponthe order, copy of which is at page 54. Perusal of the same would indicate that presence on the -2- date and time stipulated in the order. The order does not in any manner speak of any continuing presence of the minor. Therefore,apprehension is misplaced and has no basis. In any event by virtue of ad-interim order of this Court, children have not been produced. Whenever any further applications are made by the opponent to the said proceedings for production of the minor, needless to state that the learned Judge would pass appropriate order after hearing both sides and bearing in mind the welfare and interest of the minor. The petition is disposed of. (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J.) (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J.) (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J.)