1 mst IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.10155 OF 2009 Late Ravindra R. Sabnis, since deceased by LRs. Petitioners versus Rangrao Dadu Patil and another Respondents Mr.S.C.Prabhu i/by N.V.Bandiwadekar for petitioners. Mr.Amit B. Borkar for respondent nos.1 and 2. CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : 21st April 2010 PC : 1. On 17th February 2010 notice for final disposal at the admission stage was issued. The petitioners are the plaintiffs in a suit for possession of an immovable property. The respondents are the defendants. An application was made by the defendants at Exhibit-18 praying for framing three additional issues. The first issue was based on the plea of tenancy of the respondents in paragraph 2 of the written statement in respect of land bearing R.S.No.5. The second issue suggested was on the basis of contention of respondents that the suit property is a farm house and the last issue suggested was of jurisdiction. By the impugned order, the said application has been disposed of. 2. After having heard the submissions of learned counsel for the 2 parties I find that the impugned order is vague. There is no specific direction issued that the issues as suggested should be framed. The impugned order seem to suggest that the issue of jurisdiction will have to be framed and tried as a preliminary issue. However, there is no specific direction for framing an issue of tenancy as prayed by the respondents. Whether the issue of tenancy based on a plea of tenancy arises is a question which will have to be considered by the Trial Court in accordance with the settled position of law. It appears to me that the application at Exhibit-18 has not been decided on merits. Therefore, by setting aside the impugned order, the application will have to be directed to be reheard. 3. Hence, I pass following order :- A) The impugned order dated 28th August 2008 is quashed and set aside and application at Exhibit-18 is restored to the file of Trial Court; B) The application at Exhibit-18 shall be decided afresh in accordance with law after hearing the parties. The application shall be decided expeditiously; C) All contentions of the parties are expressly kept open. (A.S.OKA, J.)