PADAM CHAND TAMBI Vs. DAMODAR JOHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a civil revision petition filed by the defendants-petitioners against the order of the District Judge, Jaipur City, Jaipur.

(2.) HAVING heard the learned counsel for the parties, I find that the principal question raised in this case, whether the order of the lower court directing that the applications, one under 0. 39 R- 1 & 2 CPC and another under O. 40 R. 1, CPC filed by the plaintiff-non-petitioner No. 1, Damodar and the application under S. 34 of the Arbitration Act filed by the defendants-petitioners, would be decided simultaneously; suffers from any error of jurisdiction as contemplated by S. 115 C. P. C.

(3.) ACCORDING to him, the effect of such proceedings will be that the application under O. 39 Rr. 1 & 2 CPC and under 0. 40 R. 1, CPC, would not be heard. In such circumstances, Shri Patodiya. argued that it was imperative for the lower court to hear and decide the application under S. 34 of the Arbitration Act; and the proceeding to hear the application for injunction and appointment of Receiver should only be taken if the same is dismissed.