41 WP-11793-26.DOC IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 11793 OF 2026 Mahesh Brahmadatta Tiwari ..Petitioner Versus Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai & anr. …Respondents Mr. Siddhesh Pilankar, for the Petitioner. Mr. D R Kawale, for the Respondent No.1 - BMC. CORAM : N. J. JAMADAR, J. DATE : 08th September 2026 P.C.: 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner. 2. The challenge in this petition is to an order passed by the learned Judge, City Civil Court whereby the learned Judge City Civil Court has declined to delete the issues framed on 02nd April, 2026 on the point of bar of res judicata and the maintainability of the suit. 3. Mr. Pilankar, the learned Counsel for the petitioner, submitted that, neither the bar of res judicata nor the provisions contained in Order XXII Rule 9 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, are attracted to the facts of the case at hand. SAINATH, PA 1/2 SAINATH SANJAY BODKHE Digitally signed by SAINATH SANJAY BODKHE Date: 2026.09.11 21:47:55 +0530 41 WP-11793-26.DOC 4. Indisputably, L.C. Suit No. 5399 oof 1997 was instituted by the Plaintiff and a jdugment has been rendered therein on merits. Likewise, RAE & R Suit No. 392 of 1991 was dismissed by the Court of Small Causes and Appeal No. 125 of 2001 thereagainst was also dismissed. 5. The questions of the instant suit being barred by res judicata and the maintainability of the suit are to be decided by the trial Court after appraisal of pleadings, issues, judgments in the previous proceedings and the material on record. At this stage, the issues cannot be deleted by delving into the merits of the applicability or otherwise of the provisions contained in Section 11 and Order XXII Rule 9 of the Code, 1908. 6. The Writ Petition stands dismissed. 7. However, all the questions are expressly kept open for adjudication before the trial Court. [N. J. JAMADAR, J.] SAINATH, PA 2/2