ROOPA RANI Vs. MEENA GHAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has invoked the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India seeking writ in the nature of certiorari, quashing the impugned order dtd. 12/7/2017 (Annexure No. 1) passed by the Civil Judge (Sr. Div.) Roorkee in O.S. No. 51 of 2007 Chamanlal and anr. vs. Meena Ghai and further judgment dtd. 6/2/2019 (Annexure No. 2) passed by 1st A.D.J. Roorkee in Civil Revision No. 98 of 2017 Smt. Roopa Rani vs. Meena Ghai and ors.

(2.) Facts, in brief, are that Chamanlal (respondent no. 5) and petitioner filed a suit no. 51 of 2007, Chamanlal and ors. vs. Smt. Meena Ghai and ors., in the court of Civil Judge (Sr. Div.) Roorkee, against the defendants (respondent no. 1 and 2 herein) seeking perpetual prohibitory injunction. Subsequently, respondent no. 4 herein has filed O.S. No. 54 of 2007 Satprakash vs. Reena and others for cancellation of sale deed dtd. 31/10/2006. Respondent no. 6 and 7 herein also filed O.S. No. 148 of 2013, Champa Rani and anr. vs. Kanihya Lal and ors. for partition of 17 share of the property in dispute. Since, all these three suits pertaining to one disputed parties, having common parties, the petitioner plaintiff filed an application for consolidation of all the three suits to avoid conflict findings in the matter. The trial court vide order dtd. 12/7/2017 had rejected the application on the count that though, witnesses in all the cases may be same but parties have to adduce different evidence in these three cases, as suit no. 191 of 2017 is pertaining to prohibitory injunction, suit no. 54 of 2007 pertaining to cancellation of sale deed and suit no. 148 of 2013 pertaining to partition.

(3.) Feeling aggrieved, petitioner preferred civil revision no. 98 of 2017 Smt. Rupa Rani vs. Smt. Meena Ghai and ors. Learned revisional court reiterating the reasons recorded by the trial court affirmed the order of the trial court and dismissed the revision by order dtd. 8/2/2019.