1 abs IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 2041 OF 2010 Tahira Industries (India) Pvt. Ltd. .. Petitioner V/s Bhatia Balrakshak Vidyalaya Trust & Ors. .. Respondents Mr. G.S. Godbole i/b Mr. Karan Thorat for the petitioner. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J. DATE : 10TH JUNE 2010 P.C. : 1. Heard. 2. Apart from the fact that the petition is directed against an interlocutory order and therefore requires no interference in exercise of writ jurisdiction, I am not inclined to interfere even on merits for the reasons indicated below. 3. In a suit for possession filed by the respondent nos.1 to 8, the petitioner (tenant) raised a defence that the Small Causes Court had no jurisdiction to entertain and try the suit, inter alia, on the grounds that section 41 of the Presidency Small Causes Court Act was not applicable and the petitioner was a protected tenant under the Maharashtra Rent Control Act. The Court accordingly framed an issue regarding 2 jurisdiction but rejected the request of the petitioner to try it as a preliminary issue. 4. I find no error in the decision of the Trial Court. The issue in the present case as to whether the Small Causes Court had jurisdiction to entertain and try the suit is a mixed issued of fact and law requiring adducing of evidence. The respondent no.9 is a sub-tenant and is a company having paid- up share capital of more than a crore of rupees. According to the respondent nos.1 to 8 in view of section 3(1)(b) of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, the provisions of the Rent Control Act are not applicable. According to the petitioner, the provisions of Maharashtra Rent Control Act do apply because the sub-tenancy of the respondent no.9 has been terminated by the petitioner. Termination of tenancy is a disputed question of fact requiring adducing of evidence at the trial. Since the issue of jurisdiction involves adjudication on disputed question of fact, the Trial Court has committed no error in declining to try it as a preliminary issue. The writ petition is accordingly rejected summarily. (D.G. KARNIK, J.)