RADHAKISHIN N ADVANI Vs. SHEILA GOBIND MIRCHANDANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal from an order of a Judge of the City Civil Court, Bombay, (Judge Guttal) whereby on a Notice of Motion taken out by the plaintiff he granted an interim injunction in terms of prayer (c) of the Notice of Motion and adjourned the hearing of the Notice pf Motion itself till the hearing of the suit.

(2.) It requires to be stated at once that the 1st defendant in reply to the application for interim relief took up the plea that the City Civil Court, Bombay, had no jurisdiction to entertain and try this suit and/or grant any interim relief Inter alia on the ground that the value of the subject-matter of the suit, viz., a fiat In Brothers Co-operative Housing Society Ltd., Mahim, being Rs. 35,000/-, exceeded the pecuniary jurisdiction of the Court Secondly it was contended that the City Civil Court would have no jurisdiction because the plaintiff was claiming under a will left by one Jethmal Mulchand Mal-kani (who died on the 24th of October, 1972) unless a probate of the will was obtained from the High Court.

(3.) It would appear that the learned Judge did not appreciate the scope and ambit of Section 9-A of the Civil Procedure Code, which was introduced in 1970. Now, Section 9-A reads as follows:--