Back
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA
Dipak Sarmah S/o Late Dhurjyoti Sarmah – Appellant
Versus
Khairul Hussain S/o Late Tayeb Ali – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA, J.
1. Heard Mr. P. Khataniar, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. A.K. Jain, the learned counsel for respondent No. 3. No one has appeared for respondent Nos. 1 & 2, though the names of two counsels, namely, Mr. M Kashyap and Mr. S.A. Singh are shown as engaged counsel for the said respondents in the cause list. It also appears that on the last date i.e. on 15.10.2025, Mr. N Bhuyan, learned counsel had appeared on behalf of Mr. M Kashyap, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 1 & 2. However, since when the matter was called on for hearing, no one has appeared for respondent Nos. 1 & 2, this Court decided to proceed ex-parte against the said respondents in this Civil Revision Petition.
2. This Civil Revision Petition (I/O) under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner Deepak Sarmah, impugning the order dated 22.02.2024 passed by the Court of learned Civil Judge No. 2, Kamrup (M), Guwahati in Title Suit No. 713/2022 whereby the application filed by respondent No. 3 under Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 read with Section 151 of the said Code was allowed and the further proceedings of Title
The applicability of Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure requires the entire subject matter of both suits to be identical; differing key reliefs negate automatic stay of proceedings.
The applicability of Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure requires complete identity of subject matter between suits; overlapping issues do not justify staying subsequent proceedings.
Consolidation of suits under Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure is permissible if the suits involve common questions of law and fact, and consolidation would avoid conflicting opinions and ser....
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....
Section 10 of the CPC requires complete identity of subject matter for staying proceedings in concurrent suits; conflicting properties undermine the applicability of this provision.
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
