Dhananjay Anna Wadekar vs Sudhakar Sonaji Wadekar And ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 13743 Bom

                                                                           929.WP.5911.21odt


                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                            BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                             WRIT PETITION NO.5911 OF 2021

         Dhananjay Anna Wadekar,
         Age :44 years, Occu. Agri.
         R/o. Gopalpur,
         Tq. & Dist. Aurangabad.                              ...       PETITIONER
                                                                     (Orig. Plaintiff)
               VERSUS

1.       Sudhakar Sonaji Wadekar,
         Age : 37 years, Occ: Agri.,
         R/o. Gopalpur,
         Tq. & Dist. Aurangabad.
2.       Bandu Sonaji Wadekar,
         Age : 30 years, Occ: Agri.,
         R/o. Gopalpur,
         Tq. & Dist. Aurangabad.
3.       Varsha Sudhakar Wadekar,
         Age : 33 years, Occ: Household
         R/o. Gopalpur,
         Tq. & Dist. Aurangabad.
4.       Dhrupadabai Sonaji Wadekar,
         Age : 58 years, Occ: Household
         R/o. Gopalpur,
         Tq. & Dist. Aurangabad.
5.       Sonaji Kisan Wadekar,
         Age : 63 years, Occ: Agri.,
         R/o. Gopalpur,
         Tq. & Dist. Aurangabad.
6.       Sunita Bandu Wadekar,
         Age : 28 years, Occ: Household
         R/o. Gopalpur,
         Tq. & Dist. Aurangabad.                      ...       RESPONDENTS
                                                             (Orig. Defendants)
                              ...
Advocate for Petitioner: Mr. Dinesh U. Manwatkar h/f. Mr. Sachin S. Randive
                              ...

                                    CORAM   :   MANGESH S. PATIL, J.

                                    DATE    :   23.09.2021








                                                                              929.WP.5911.21odt


ORAL JUDGMENT :

                 Heard.

2. The The petitioner is the original plaintiff in Regular Civil Suit

No.805/2017, taking objection to the order passed under Section 10 of the

Code of Civil Procedure directing his suit to be stayed till decision of the

Regular Civil Suit No.593/2017.

3. I have carefully gone through the papers particularly the

pleadings in both the suits. The petitioner in his suit is seeking declaration

of his being the owner in possession of the suit property and perpetual

injunction passed on sale deed No.1992/2017. In RCS No.593/2017 the

respondent Nos. 1 and 2 herein are claiming a declaration that the self same

sale deed is null and void. The petitioner is the defendant No.1 in that suit.

It is thus quite apparent that whether the sale deed is valid or otherwise is a

matter which is directly and substantially in issue in both the suits. Since

the suit of the petitioner has been filed at a latter point of time, I find no

apparent illegality or perversity in the view taken by the learned Civil Judge

that by virtue of the provision of Section 10, in order to avoid conflicting

decisions, when the issue involved in both the suits is directly and

substantially the same and even the parties are same the petitioner's suit

deserves to be stayed.

4. The Writ Petition is dismissed in limine.

(MANGESH S. PATIL, J.) habeeb