For staying the proceeding of a subsequent suit under Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, all the issues involved in the two suits for adjudication should be identical.

DEVI PRASAD SINGH, J.

( 1 ) PLAINTIFFS-PETITIONERS have filed a Regular Suit No. 152 of 2000, Gayadeen v. Smt. Phulla Devi and Ors. for permanent injunction with a prayer to restrain Smt. Phulla Devi not to interfere with the disputed property. Subsequently, another regular suit was filed, which was registered as regular Suit No. 246 of 2000, Smt. Phulla Devi v. Gaya Deen for cancellation of registered Will in question. Accordingly, an application under Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure was moved for staying proceeding of the Regular Suit No. 246 of 2000. The trial court as well as revisional court had declined to stay the proceeding of the subsequent suit on the ground that the cause of action of both the suits are not identical.

( 2 ) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioners has relied upon the judgments in Ram Narain v. Ram swarup and Ors. AIR1962 All 108 (V 49 C 30), followed by another judgment in Smt. Meena v. Sri Krishna Kumar and Anr. 2000 (1)AWC786 , and submits that the controversy in both the suits are directly and substantially same. Accordingly, the proceeding of subsequent suit may be stayed.

( 3 ) ON the other hand, Full Benchs judgment in Ram Charan v. State of U. P. AIR 1979 All 114 and one other case in Mohd. Islam Ahmad Khan v. 1st Additional District Judge 1997 (15) LCD 915 : 1997 (2) AWC 2. 227 (NOC) : 1997 (2) AWC 2. 227 (NOC), has been relied upon by the respondents counsel who proceeded to submit that since in both the suits all the issues are not same, hence the trial court as well as revisional court has rightly rejected the petitioners application filed under Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

( 4 ) I have given my anxious consideration to the arguments advanced by the learned Counsel for the parties. The purpose of Section 10 is to prevent the course of concurrent jurisdiction in substantially parallel suits bearing same issues. Accordingly, in case the issues are identical in two regular suits then a court of competent jurisdiction has right to stay the proceeding of a suit till the final outcome of earlier one. Section 10 of Code of Civil Procedure is reproduced here as under: section 10.--No Court shall proceed with the trial of any suit in which the matter in issue is also directly and substantially in issue in a previously instituted suit between the same parties, or between parties under whom they or any of them claim litigating under the same title where such suit is pending in the same or any other Court in India having jurisdiction to grant the relief claimed, or any Court beyond the limits of India established or continued by the Central government and having like jurisdiction, or before the Supreme Court.

( 5 ) A plain reading of Section 10 shows that the proceeding of subsequent suit may be stayed in case the matter in issue is directly and substantially same as of previously instituted suit between the parties. In the present case, in the earlier suit, i. e. Regular Suit No. 152 of 2000 only prayer for permanent injunction was made by the Plaintiffs/petitioners relying upon the registered Will. On the other hand, the respondent had filed Regular Suit No. 246 of 2000 for cancellation of registered Will. Relief claimed m two suits are entirely different. In a suit of permanent injunction registered Will cannot be cancelled. Accordingly, the learned court below has rightly given a finding that facts in issue are different.

( 6 ) IN the case of Ram Narain (supra) this Court had held that the object of Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure is to prevent Courts of concurrent jurisdiction from simultaneously trying two parallel suits in respect of the same matter in issue. It has been further held that under Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure the proceeding of subsequent suit may be stayed only in case directly and substantially the issues in both the suits are same.

( 7 ) IN the case of Smt. Meena Bhandari, this Court after considering the various judgments of this court

Click Here to Read the rest of this document