SOMA RAMAMOHAN REDDY Vs. SOME SARASWATHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Court ordered notice before admission on 07-10-2005 and Sri E.V. Bhagiratha Rao entered appearance representing the respondent in the Civil Revision Petition.

(2.) In view of the urgency pleaded by both the counsel, Sri K. Raghuveer Reddy representing the revision petitioner and Sri T. Sharath representing Sri E.V. Bhagiratha Rao, the counsel for the respondent, the matter is being finally disposed of at the stage of admission.

(3.) Sri K. Raghuveer Reddy, the learned counsel representing the revision petitioner/respondent in O.P.No.21 of 2003 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Proddatur, made the following submissions: - The learned counsel would maintain that invoking the powers under Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code' for the purpose of convenience) suo motu in the facts and circumstances of the case cannot be permitted. The learned counsel also would maintain that when the status of the wife itself is in controversy, in the other two pending suits filed by the contesting parties, without deciding the preliminary question relating to the status of the wife, staying the main O.P. under Section 10 of the Code that too after hearing the arguments cannot be sustained, in the light of the language of Section 10 of the Code. The learned counsel also explained that even otherwise the matter in issue in the O.P. and the suits being not one and the same, provisions of Section 10 of the Code are not applicable. Further the learned counsel also would contend that the words trial of the suit' in Section 10 of the Code assume some importance and hence at a later stage that too at the fag end, the benefit available to the parties, under Section 10 of the Code, cannot be extended. The learned counsel also pointed out to the reliefs which had been prayed for in the other pending suits and the relief which had been prayed for in, the O.P.No.21 of 2003.