SANJITA KUMARI Vs. BHOLA PRASAD AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff, Sanjita Kumari, of Title Suit No. 37 of 1980 pending in the court of Munsif, Nalanda at Biharsharif has come up to this court in revision against an order dated 5.2.1983 passed by the learned Munsif rejecting her prayer to stay the hearing of this suit till the disposal of Title Suit No. 107 of 1978 pending in the court of Additional Subordinate Judge, Biharsharif. The application was filed under Sec. 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure read with Sec. 151 thereof (hereinafter to be referred to as the Code). The relevant facts to be taken note of are very short and simple. Plaintiff No. 4 in Title Suit No. 107 of 1978 was Sanjita Kumari with regard to whose identity as to whether she was actually Sanjita Kumari or not was a matter in controversy and the matter at one stage came up to this Court.

(2.) Comming to the interpretation of Sec. 10 of the Code which is more pertinent and relevant in this context is that to quote the words of Chagla C.J. speaking for the Bench: - -

(3.) In the instant case that is exactly the point. If this Sanjita Kumari of the earlier suit is the real Sanjita Kumari then the present suit is bound to fail: on the contrary, if she is an imposter then the present suit will take its own course and be decided in accordance with law. 'Therefore, the field of controversy contemplated by Sec. 10 of the Code although not identical and the same in every particular, the identity and the field of controversy is substantially the same. The case is, therefore, squarely covered by this well settled principle of law. The learned Munsif has, therefore, clearly committed a jurisdictional error by not granting stay of the suit instituted later. I am, therefore, constrained to hold that the impugned order suffers from a jurisdictional infirmity and has to be set aside. This application is, accordingly, allowed and Title Suit No. 37 of 1980 herein before mentioned must remain stayed till the disposal of Title Suit No. 107 of 1978 pending in the court of 2nd Additional Subordinate Judge. Biharshariff at a very early date. However, in the circumstances of the case, I shall make no order as to costs.