- (1.) The petitioner-original defendant has filed the present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 6.10.09 passed by the Addl. District Judge No.9, Jaipur City, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as 'the trial court') in Civil Suit No.17/06, whereby the trial court has consolidated the Civil Suit being No. 17/06 with the Civil Suit No. 161/07 pending between the same parties.
(2.) There are certain undisputed facts in the present petition. The petitioner was working as a General Manager (Production) with the respondent-company from 1994. On 1.6.02 an agreement was executed by the petitioner in favour of the company to serve 10 years on the terms and conditions mentioned therein. Subsequently, another agreement was executed on 23.5.05 with regard to confidentiality and return all the documents on the terms and conditions mentioned in the said agreement. Thereafter, the petitioner resigned from the said post on 2.1.06. The respondent-company, therefore, filed the suit being No. 17/06 on 4.2.06 seeking declaratory relief in respect of the agreement dated 23.3.05 and also seeking damages to the tune of Rs. 6,04,320/- from the petitioner. The respondent-company thereafter filed the second suit being No. 161/07 against the petitioner seeking specific performance of the agreement dated 1.6.02 and alternatively for damages to the tune of Rs.25,30,366/-. The respondent-company i.e. the plaintiff in both the suits thereafter submitted an application for consolidation of both the suit under Section 151 of CPC, which application has been allowed by the trial court vide the impugned order dated 6.10.09. Being aggrieved by the said order, the present petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
(3.) It has been submitted by the learned counsel Mr. Virendra Agrawal for the petitioner that the subject matter of both the suits being different, the issues involved being also different, the trial court should not have exercised its inherent powers under Section 151 of CPC for consolidation of both the suits. He has submitted that in the first suit subject matter was the agreement dated 23.5.05 and in the subsequent suit, the subject matter was the agreement dated 1.6.02 and the claim for damages were also on different grounds, and hence both the suits could not have been consolidated. Mr. Agrawal has relied upon the judgments of this court in case of Bhola Shankar and Laxmi Narayan Agrawal Vs. Rent Tribunal & Ors., 2009 3 WLN(Raj) 556 and in case of M/s. Anurag & Co. & Anr. Vs. Addl. District Judge & Ors.,2006 2 WLN(Raj) 160 in support of his submission.;