✦ Bombay High Court · 08 Jun 2006

Shri Narayan Bapu Pisal v. M/s. Sahyadri Engineering

Case at a glance

Provisions considered

Judgment

Shri Narayan Bapu Pisal and ors. .. Petitioners vs. M/s. Sahyadri Engineering & Welding Works and anr. .. Respondents None for the petitioners. Mr. P.S. Dani for respondent no.1. Mr. A.P. Kulkarni for respondent no.2. CORAM: B.H. MARLAPALLE, J. CORAM: B.H. MARLAPALLE, J. CORAM: B.H. MARLAPALLE, J. Date : June 08, 2006. Date : June 08, 2006. Date : June 08, 2006. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.:

#1. The application at Exh. 51 in Special Civil Suit No.298 of 2004 was filed under Section 9A of C.P.C. contending that the suit was not maintainable and the said application has been rejected by the impugned order dated 17/9/2004 by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division at Kolhapur.

#2. In view of the proviso to the amended Section 115 of the C.P.C. the impugned order has to be challenged by filing a Civil Revision Application and :2: when such a statutory remedy is available, the writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution cannot be entertained.

#3. The petition is, therefore, disposed off with liberty to file Civil Revision Application. (B.H. Marlapalle,J.) (B.H. Marlapalle,J.) (B.H. Marlapalle,J.)

Questions this judgment answers

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — ss. 9A, 115; Constitution of India — art. 227.

Which court decided this case, and when?

Bombay High Court, on 08 Jun 2006. The bench was B H MARLAPALLE.

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Bombay High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. Writ Petition No. 8284 of 2004). ← Search more judgments