GULAB DEVI Vs. ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE & OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this writ petition is to the order dated 22.10.2008 whereby the Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Division) No. 2, Jaipur District Jaipur, allowed the application filed by the defendant-respondents under Section 10 of CPC and stayed the proceedings of the suit.

(2.) Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and carefully perused the relevant material on record including the impugned order, it is noticed that the learned trial court is found to have allowed the application observing that the parties in the instant suit and the suit filed before the revenue court are materially and substantially the same and the number of disputed khasra nos. are also the same. The learned trial court is also found to have observed that the petitioner-plaintiff filed a suit for declaration and injunction before the revenue court, and in the civil court he filed a suit imploring the cancellation of the sale deed. Unless the revenue suit is decided, the decision of the suit filed later-on is meaningless. Since the fact in issue more or less between both the suits is directly and substantially the same and the parties are also the same, the provisions of Section 10 CPC operate. The learned trial court has discussed all these facts and critically analyzed the facts of the case ad-longum and is found to have committed no error in staying the proceedings of the later suit, which the plaintiff-petitioner is found to have filed.

(3.) The impugned order passed by the learned trial court is found to be just and apt. It does not suffer from any factual or legal infirmity. Hence, I do not find any ground to interfere with the order passed by the learned trial court. For the reasons stated above the writ petition fails and the same being bereft of any merit deserves to be dismissed, which stands dismissed accordingly.