Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH AT AIZAWL BENCH
Parthivjyoti Saikia
Syed Sahidul Islam S/O- Late Kutubuddin Ahmed – Appellant
Versus
Raifuddin Ahmed @ Rick Baba S/O- Md. Mohin Ahmed – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. application challenging lower court's order (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. counsel's submissions considered (Para 8) |
| 3. tests for application of section 10 cpc (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 4. revision petition dismissed as devoid of merit (Para 13) |
JUDGMENT :
Heard Mr. S.J. Sarma, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. A. Ikbal, learned senior counsel representing the sole respondent.
2. This is an application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 03.03.2017 passed by the learned Civil Judge No.3, Kamrup (M) at Guwahati in T.S. No.114/2014.
3. The present petitioners filed T.S. 244/2006 in the court of the Munsiff No.3 at Guwahati praying for a declaration that they are lawful occupiers in respect of the suit property and prayed for permanent injunction restraining the present respondent (the defendant in the said suit) from forcible dispossession from the suit property.
4. The T.S. 244/2006 was decreed on contest and the present respondent (the defendant in the said suit) filed an appeal being T.A. 123/2014.
5. Thereafter, the present respondent (the defendant in T.S. 244/2006) filed another suit being T.S. 114/2014 aga
For a stay under Section 10 of the CPC, issues in both suits must be directly and substantially identical; differing issues result in dismissal of stay applications.
The court ruled that disparate issues in two suits negate the application of Section 10 CPC, as previous judgments do not influence subsequent proceedings in this context.
Section 10 CPC mandates stay of subsequent suit if issues directly/substantially same as prior pending suit between same parties on common property/cause challenging prior decree, preventing parallel....
The court clarified that distinct issues in separate suits do not warrant a stay under Section 10 of the CPC, emphasizing the need for identity in both the matter in issue and the relief sought.
Section 10 of the CPC prevents concurrent trials of suits with identical issues; distinct issues allow separate proceedings.
Section 10 CPC applies only when issues in both suits are directly and substantially the same; otherwise, separate proceedings may continue without conflict.
Under Section 10 CPC, different reliefs sought in suits permit simultaneous proceedings, as the provision aims to prevent concurrent trials of the same matter.
Civil Suit - Title of revision petition - Power of superintendence cannot be exercised merely to correct errors of law or fact or just because another view, other than taken by subordinate court is a....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
