(1.) The revisionist is one of the defendants in Original Suit No.352 of 2006. The suit was instituted by the plaintiff-opposite party for mandatory injunction. The defendants in the said suit moved an application 69 Ga before the trial court pointing out that a matter arising out of Original Suit No.721 of 2005 is pending before this Hon'ble Court, in which validity of Will dated 27.3.1985 on the basis of which the plaintiff claims title to the suit property, is an issue under consideration. It was further pointed out that by an order dated 13.11.2006 the instant suit was clubbed with Original Suit No.721 of 2005 and the said suit was made the leading case. Consequently, it was prayed that since the leading case is pending before this Court and, therefore, proceedings of Original Suit No.352 of 2006 be stayed.
(2.) The application was opposed by the plaintiff stating that there was no stay by any court to the proceedings of the instant suit.
(3.) The trial court, by an order dated 11.5.2015, rejected the application. Aggrieved thereby, some of the defendants preferred application under Article 227 No.3830 of 2015 before this Court. The petition was dismissed by order dated 18.8.2015 by noting that the defendants themselves admit that Original Suit No.721 of 2005 stood dismissed and as such the application filed by them on the ground that the proceedings of the instant suit are to be stayed during the pendency of the Original Suit No.721 of 2005, was a misconceived one. However, liberty was reserved in favour of the defendants to move a separate application raising plea of Section 10 C.P.C., in case they are so advised.