BHAGWAN SINGH Vs. HAMIR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition is directed against the order dated March 22, 1991 passed by the trial Court whereby an application for stay of proceedings in the suit was dismissed.

(2.) BHAGWAN Singh and others purchased the land in dispute situated in village Ratia, Tehsil Ratia, district Hissar from Sadhu by registered sale deed dated January 13, 1988. Hamir Singh filed a suit for possession by way of preemption claiming a superior right of pre-emption. The suit was filed on November 25, 1989. Bhagwan Singh etc. improved their status by way of purchase of another piece of land measuring 6 Kanals 9 Marlas compromised in the same Khewat by registered sale deed dated June 14, 1988. Hamir Singh also filed a suit for possession by way of pre-emption in respect of sale relating to 6 Kanals 9 Marlas. In the other suit, the present plaintiff who is also pre-emptor in that suit, moved an application under Section 28-A of the Punjab Pre-emption Act praying for stay of proceedings till the decision of this suit. The said application was dismissed and that order is the subject matter of Civil Revision No. 794 of 1991. The High Court stayed the proceedings in that case during the pendency of the revision petition. It is in these circumstances an application was moved by the defendants of this case for stay of proceeding. Learned trial Court after considering the submissions of the counsel for the parties dismissed the application by order under revision. It is how the present revision came to be filed by the defendants.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners only submitted that since the two suits are inter-connected, interest of justice requires that proceedings in this case be stayed till the disposal of the other suit. I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel and find no merit therein. Learned trial Court has given cogent reasons for declining the prayer of the petitioners. This suit relates to a sale which is prior in point of time. It has to be decided first and the question of stay of proceedings in this case does not arise. The sale which is latter in point of time is also the subject matter of other preemption suit. The said suit has nothing to do with the proceedings of the present suit. Therefore, the trial Court rightly came of to the conclusion that the proceedings in this case are not liable to be stayed simply because a revision is pending in the High Court against the order rejecting the application of the present petitioners under Section 28-A of the Punjab Pre-emption Act filed in that suit. Even otherwise, no illegality or material irregularity could be pointed out by the counsel for the petitioners. In the situation aforesaid, I see no merit in the revision and the same is dismissed. No costs. .