SHIVENDRA PAL Vs. YUDHISTER PAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is impugning the order dtd. 3/12/2019 (Annexure P-19) passed by learned Civil Judge (Jr.Divn.), Panchkula whereby his application dtd. 11/3/2019 (Annexure P-18) filed under Sec. 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, 'the Code') filed under Sec. 151 of the Code for deciding his application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the Code (Annexure P-17) was dismissed on the ground of it having been rendered infructuous.

(2.) Learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner vehemently contends that the impugned order suffers from patent illegality and is contrary to the settled position of law pertaining to stay of suit under Sec. 10 of the Code.

(3.) Learned senior counsel for the petitioner has argued that the Trial Court while dismissing the application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the Code erred in observing that it had been rendered infructuous by failing to appreciate that there was no bar on the powers of the Trial Court to entertain and decide interlocutory applications filed by the parties even if the trial had been stayed under Sec. 10 of the Code.