Two parallel remedies in respect of the same subject matter at the same time cannot be allowed.

1. 1. In this writ petition petitioner has prayed for restraining the respondent No. 2 from dispossessing him from the land in dispute i.e. Plot No. No. 228-B situated at Bhagat-ki-Kothi, Jodhpur.

2. The preliminary objection raised by the learned Counsel for respondents No. 2 and 5 is that the petitioner has availed remedy by way of filing Civil Suit in the Court of Munsif (City), Jodhpur and has application for temporary injunction has been rejected and as such the writ petition should not be entertained.

3. This is not in dispute that petitioner has filed a Civil Suit for declaration and perpetual injunction regarding the same subject matter. This is also the admitted position that the application for temporary injunction under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 was rejected by the learned Munsif. The appeal filed against that order was dismissed by the Addl. District Judge No. 1, Jodhpur. A revision petition filed against the order of the learned District Judge was also rejected by the learned Single Judge of this Court. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the subject matter of dispute in the Civil Suit is the same which is here in this writ petition but the relief sought different. Mr. Bhandari submits that here he wants a direction for respondent No. 2 not to dispossess him otherwise than in accordance with law.

4. It is this relief which has been sought in the suit for perpetual injunction. When the petitioner has taken recourse by way of filing the Civil Suit, he cannot be permitted to agitate the same point here in this Court. In Jai Singh v. Union of India and Ors., AIR 1977 S.C. 898 the question of parallel remedy in respect of the same subject matter in a Civil Suit as well as under writ jurisdiction came for consideration before their Lordships of the Supreme Court of India and their Lordships held that two parallel remedies in respect of the same subject matter at the same time cannot be allowed. The preliminary objection raised by learned Counsel holds good. The writ petition stands dismissed on this ground.Petition dismissed.

*******