S.SUBRAMANI Vs. GOVINDAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mrs. A.L. Gandhimathi, learned counsel for the Revision Petitioners and Mr. V.R. Rajasekaran, learned counsel for the Respondent. One Sengoda Nadar and Perianna Nadar have filed the suit in O.S. No. 408 of 1981 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Salem seeking the relief of permanent injunction. The respondent herein also filed the suit in O.S. No. 1544 of 1982 before the same Court for the relief of permanent injunction. After hearing the counsel for both sides, the trial Court decreed the suit in O.S. No. 408 of 1981 and dismissed the suit in O.S. No. 1544 of 1982 by an order dated 30.03.1990. The judgment passed by the trial court in both the suits was the subject matter of S.A. Nos. 389 and 1390 of 1992 before this Court. It appears that as against the judgment and decree passed in the Second Appeals by this Court, Special Leave Petitions in S.L.P. Nos. 15105 and 15106 of 2003 were filed and pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. During the pendency of the Special Leave Petition, the Respondent has filed the present suit in O.S. No. 389 of 1993 before the learned II Additional District Munsif, Salem for declaration to declare that the assessment made to the property is null and void. Both the Plaintiffs as well as Defendants in O.S. No. 389 of 1993 and the parties in S.L.P. Nos. 15105 and 15106 of 2003 are one the same. Therefore, the Revision Petitioner, who are the Defendants 4 and 5 in the above suit in O.S. No. 389 of 1993 have filed I.A. No. 601 of 2011 under section 10 of CPC with a prayer to stay all further proceedings of the suit in O.S. No. 389 of 1993 till the disposal of the S.L.P. Nos. 15105 and 15106 of 2003 pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The learned Second Additional District Munsif dismissed the application which is questioned in this Civil Revision Petition.

(2.) The trial court, without considering the factual aspects and Section 10 of CPC, refused to grant interim stay. On perusal of the documents filed by the Civil Revision Petitioners in page No. 29 an order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court is annexed which arises out of the judgment and decree passed by this Court in the above mentioned second appeals. During the course of the arguments by either side, the respondent has not disputed that the S.L.P. Nos. 15105 and 15106 of 2003 are pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the parties in the above said Special Leave Petition are one and the same. Therefore, I am inclined to set aside the order of the learned District Munsif Court, Salem, in I.A. No. 601 of 2011 in O.S. No. 389 of 1993. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the Civil Revision Petition is allowed. There will be an interim stay of all further proceedings in O.S. No. 389 of 1993 till the disposal of the S.L.P. Nos. 15105 and 15106 of 2003, pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.