1 mp t IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 5371 of 2008 Mrs.Kamla A. Bharwani, (decd) thru L.H.Ms.Neena B.Bharwani & ors. .. Petitioners versus Mr.Abdul Quddus Haji Abdul Rajak .. Respondents (decd) by LRs. ... Mr.R.S. Datar i/b Rohan Darandale for the petitioners. CORAM : A.M.KHANWILKAR, J DATED : 27th August 2008 P.C.: 1. Counsel for the petitioner fairly accepts that although the prayer clause records that the petition is filed under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, however the petition is essentially only under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Be that as it may, the order which is impugned in this petition is dated 17th June 2 2008. The order clearly records that the documents produced by the other side is subject to objection regarding the correct translation thereof to be considered at the appropriate stage. If it is so, no interference with the discretionary order passed by the trial court is warranted in exercise of writ jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution. 2. Counsel for the petitioner would contend that the trial court has adopted procedure which is unknown to the provisions of Code of Civil Procedure or for that matter, the Civil Court Manual. It is well established position that if there is no express provision regarding the procedural matter which the court would like to adopt in a given case, is entitled to invoke inherent powers u/s.151 of the Code. The order which is impugned in this petition is therefore ascribable to section 151 of the Code. Thus understood, no interference is warranted. Dismissed. 3. It is once again made clear that the question as to the correctness of the translation or the proof and admissibility of the document taken on record by the trial court is kept open to be decided at the appropriate stage. 3 (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J)