MP 1 CRA526_10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 526 OF 2010 Bombay Social Service and others ... Applicants Versus Ahmed Haji Mohamed ... Respondent Mr. Bharat Joshi for Applicants. Mr. G. S. Godbole for Respondent. CORAM : B.R. GAVAI, J. MONDAY, MARCH 28, 2011 P. C. : By way of present petition, the petitioner challenges the order dated 27th July 2010 vide which the learned Trial Court has held that it has a pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain the suit. 2. The learned Counsel for the petitioner has asserted two grounds; (i) that the court lacks inherent jurisdiction inasmuch as the suit is between the licensor and licensee and as such exclusively triable by the Court of Small Causes and (ii) insofar as pecuniary jurisdiction is concerned, the findings are not correct. 3. Insofar as the first challenge is concerned, there is no averment in the application as to how the suit would be beyond the jurisdiction of the learned City Civil Court. In that view of the matter, the challenge in that regard is without any substance. MP 2 CRA526_10 4. Insofar as pecuniary jurisdiction is concerned, the learned Trial Judge has given sound and cogent reasons. No case is made out for interference, therefore, rejected. 5. However, it is made clear that the dismissal of the petition would not come in the way of the petitioner in filing the appropriate application pertaining to inherent lack of jurisdiction. If such an application is filed, the learned Trial Judge would decide it in accordance with law. (B.R. GAVAI, J)