1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.8388 OF 2009 Laxman Vasudeo Thorat & Ors. ...Petitioners vs. Arun Dattatraya Thorat & Ors. ...Respondents Mr.Nitesh Bhatekar i/b Mr.Uday Warunjikar for the petitioners None for the respondents CORAM :A.S.OKA,J. DATE : OCTOBER 6, 2009 P.C. 1 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners. The petitioners are some of the defendants in a suit filed by respondent nos.1 to 7. Issues were framed by the trial court on 8 th April 2004 and thereafter, the first respondent-plaintiff filed an affidavit in lieu of examination-in-chief at Exh.162. An application was made by the petitioners on 13 th November 2008 praying that the issues as regards valuation of the suit property and the jurisdiction be tried as preliminary issues. By the impugned order dated 30 th June 2009, the said application has been rejected by the trial court. 2 The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the issues relating to valuation as well as jurisdiction go to the root of the matter and therefore, the said issues will have to be considered together. 2 Under sub rule 2 of rule 2 of Order XIV of the Code of Civil Procedure,1908, the court has discretion to try the issues covered by clause (a) and (b) thereof as preliminary issues. In the present case, the application for treating the issues as preliminary issue was filed by the petitioners four years after the issues were settled. Moreover, affidavit in lieu of examination in chief in the suit of the year 2002 has been already filed by the plaintiff. Therefore, the trial court rightly came to the conclusion that all issues will have to be decided together. There is no reason to interfere with the discretionary order passed by the trial court in writ jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Writ petition is rejected. JUDGE