BALAKRISHNAN Vs. VELAYUDHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The only question that arises in this civil revision petition is whether a court has jurisdiction to pass an order on an interlocutory application in this case two interlocutory applications filed for amendment of the plaint and for the appointment of a receiver because of the stay of the filing of the suit under S.10 CPC. The court below held that the court has jurisdiction to pass order on such application. The petitioner who is the first defendant in the suit questions that decision.

(2.) S.10 CPC. states that no Court shall proceed with the trial of any suit in which the matter in issue is also directly and substantially in issue in a previously instituted suit between the same parties etc. The question here is whether it could be said that in passing an order on an interlocutory application, the court would be proceeding with the trial of the suit.

(3.) In Senaji Kapurchand and others v. Pannaji Devichand AIR 1922 Bom. 276. a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court said: