1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 10486 OF 2009 ............................................................. Office Notes,Office memorandum of Coram, appearances,Court's Court's or orders or directions Judge's orders & Registrar's orders. ............................................................. Shri Neel Mohan Pungalia for the Petitioner. -- CORAM: A.S.OKA,J. DATE : 5TH JANUARY, 2010 P.C.: Heard learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner. The Petitioner is one of the Defendants. By this Writ Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner is challenging the discretionary order passed by the trial Court in exercise of powers under Rule 3A of Order XVIII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The Respondent/Plaintiff has been permitted to examine herself by the impugned order. The Respondent examined her husband as her Constituted Attorney and one more witness and thereafter, under the impugned order, she has been permitted to examine herself. 2 2. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner submitted that the husband of the Respondent/Plaintiff has deposed on behalf of the Respondent/Plaintiff and that under the Power of Attorney executed by the Respondent/Plaintiff, he is specifically empowered to give evidence on her behalf. He submitted that prejudice would be caused to the Petitioner by the impugned order. 3. I have considered the submissions. Under Rule 3A of Order XVIII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, a Court has discretion to allow a party to appear as witness after his witnesses are examined. Reasons have been recorded by the trial Court for exercising discretion. In view of reasons assigned, in exercise of power of superintendence under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, exercise of discretion under Rule 3A of Order XVIII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 cannot be entertained with. Writ Petition is accordingly rejected. JUDGE