- (1.) Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner Sri Manish Mishra and Sri Alok Kumar Srivastava for respondent No. 2, who has filed a counter affidavit for dismissing the writ petition. The petitioners in this case have approached this Court for issuing a direction to the learned Trial Court for deciding the application Ga-27 under Order VII, Rule 11 C.P.C. first before proceeding with the case. In support of the aforesaid plea, it has been urged that in the miscellaneous appeal, the learned District Judge issued such a direction, but the learned Trial Court is not following the directives issued by the appellate authority.
(2.) Sri Alok Kumar Srivastava, appearing for the respondent No. 2, says that, in fact, no direction has been issued by the learned District Judge for deciding the aforesaid application first, but a direction was issued that the question of jurisdiction may be considered first.
(3.) Sri Manish Mishra, learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that since the plea of jurisdiction was raised in the application filed under Order VII, Rule 11 C.P.C., therefore, he has made the aforesaid submission, though he also says that the question of jurisdiction may be directed to be decided first. He also submits that though the Trial Court on 11.2.2009 passed an order that the application Ga-27 under Order VII, Rule 11 C.P.C. be decided first, but it is proceeding with the matter without deciding the said application.;