MANIRAM ARUN & OTHERS Vs. DEVI LAL ASHIYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By filing this petition under under Article 227 of the Constitution, the petitioners have challenged the order dated 10.1.2012 whereby their application under Section 10 read with Section 151 C.P.C. is rejected by the Court below. The petitioners/plaintiffs filed the said application Annexure P-4 before the Court below. It is stated in the said application that there are two civil suits pending and the decision of first suit (Annexure P-3) will have an effect on the second suit (Annexure P-2).

(2.) Shri H.K.Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the Court below has erred in rejecting the said application. The Court below ought to have seen that the subject matter of first suit will have an impact on the second suit. In that eventuality, the Court below ought to have allowed the application preferred under Section 10 C.P.C. By referring to Annexure P-5, reply submitted by the respondent, it is stated that respondent has admitted that nature of both the suits is same. On the basis of aforesaid, it is stated that the Court below has erred in rejecting the said application. Lastly, reliance is placed on Annexure P-6, the judgment of Supreme Court (M/s. Chitivalasa Jute Mills vs. M/s. Jaypee Rewa Cement,2004 SAR(Civ) 305).

(3.) Per contra, Shri M.L.Sharma, learned counsel for the respondent supported the order passed by the Court below. He submits that the nature of relief, parties in the litigation are different in both the cases. Even the suit lands are different in both the cases. He submits that the necessary ingredients for invoking Section 10 C.P.C. were not available and, therefore, the Court below has not erred in passing the impugned order.