S.N.Srivastava, J. - (1.) BY an order dated 21-1-2004, trial Court directed to appoint Amin Commissioner to prepare map of the property in question. An application to recall the order dated 21-1-2004 was rejected by the impugned order dated 10-2-2004 passed by trial Court. A revision No. 48 of 2004 preferred against the said order was dismissed on 11-3-2004.
(2.) LEARNED Counsel for petitioners urged that in the application dated 28-1-2004 petitioner has made two prayers (1) To recall the order dated 21-1-2004 and (2) To stay the proceedings under Section 10 of CPC. The Courts below erred in law in dismissing the application without considering matter under Section 10 of CPC. After having heard learned Counsel for petitioners and considering the materials on record, I am of the view that the impugned orders were rightly passed in accordance with law after giving opportunity of hearing to the parties and petitioners are not prejudiced by the impugned order appointing Commissioner. There is no error of law apparent on the face of record. Court below also rightly directed to file separate application under Section 10 of CPC, if so advised. Under General Rule Civil paragraph 28 clearly mentions that separate application shall be made in regard to distinct subject-matters : "(28) Separate applications for distinct subject-matters-Separate application shall be made in regard to distinct subject-matters. Applications containing argumentative matters to be returned. - No application containing argumentative matter, e.g. quotations and discussions of the effect of certain sections of Acts or of certain rulings of the High Court, shall be placed on record. They shall be returned to applicants without any order, except an endorsement that the application is returned under this rule."
(3.) PETITIONERS' application by which two distinct prayers were made, firstly, to recall the order dated 21- 1-2004 and secondly, to stay the suit under Section 10 of CPC was not maintainable and the trial Court rightly considered the prayer No. 1 on merit and rejected the application. As directed, it is still open to petitioners to move fresh application under Section 10 of CPC, if so advised. No ground is made out for interference. Writ petition is dismissed. No order as to cost. Petition dismissed.;