*1* 39.wp.10353.10.sxw skt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 10353 OF 2010 Shri Ramesh Damodar Vanmali & Ors. ..Petitioners -Versus- Smt.Rukmini Lallan Goyal & Ors. ..Respondents .......... Mr.Satyajeet M. Mirajkar for the Petitioners. None for the Respondents. .......... CORAM : B.R. GAVAI, J. DATE : 15TH FEBRUARY, 2011. P.C. 1 By way of the present petition, the petitioners challenges the order dated 21st June 2010 vide which the application filed before the learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, Vasai passed below Exh.127 in Regular Civil Suit No.103 of 1997 came to be rejected. 2 The petitioners who are the original plaintiffs in Regular Civil Suit No. 103 of 1997 filed an application purported to be under order 16 Rule 14 of the Civil Procedure Code. 3 Mr.Mirajkar submits that the learned trial Ccourt has rejected the *2* 39.wp.10353.10.sxw application in a mechanical manner. He further submits that the learned trial Judge ought to have exercised jurisdiction under Order 16 Rule 14 and summoned the defendants as Court witnesses. 4 In so far as the grievance of the petitioners regarding the learned Judge passing the order in a mechanical manner is concerned, there appears to be some substance in the said contention. The perusal of paragraph 4 of the reply filed by the defendants before the learned trial Court could reveal that the learned trial Judge in his order, in paragraph 3 thereof, has lifted word to word from the reply of the defendants. 5 However, it is to be noted that the jurisdiction under Order 16, Rule 14 of the Civil Procedure Code is the discretionary jurisdiction and that too, would have remained to be exercised when the Court finds that it is necessary to summon particular witness for appropriate adjudication of the matter. 6 In so far as the grievance of the present petitioners regarding non stepping of the defendants into the witness box is concerned, it is the choice of the defendants whether to enter into the witness box or not. If the defendants so chooses not to step into the witness box, it is always permissible for the Court to draw the appropriate inference, therefor. *3* 39.wp.10353.10.sxw 7 In that view of the matter, no case is made out for interference. Hence the writ petition is rejected. (B.R. GAVAI, J.) -