Smt. Kalawati Wd/O Rajaramji ... vs Yashwant S/O Harishchandra ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 13999 Bom

                                                                 11..wp.7519.2019 Judg.odt
                                             1

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                          NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR

                               WRIT PETITION NO.7519 /2019

          Smt. Kalawati wd/o Rajaramji Sathaone
          Aged about - 60 yrs, Occ- Agriculturist,
          R/o- Village Dhanla, Tahsil - Mouda,
          District - Nagpur.                       ..... PETITIONER
                                                      [Orig. Plaintiff]

                                       // VERSUS //

        Yashwant s/o Harishchandra Deshmukh
        Aged about - 54 yrs, Occ- Agriculturist,
        R/o - Village Dahegaon, Tahsil - Mouda,
        District - Nagpur.                                   .... RESPONDENT
                                                               [Orig. Defendant]
 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Shri A. K. Neware, Advocate for petitioner
          Shri G. S. Sengar, Advocate for respondent.
 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                   CORAM : AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.

DATED : 28/09/2021

ORAL JUDGMENT :

1] Heard Mr. Neware, learned Counsel for the petitioner and

Mr. Sengar, learned Counsel for the respondent.

2] Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by

consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties.

3] The original plaintiff, in Regular Civil Suit No.27 of 2015

has filed a suit for specific performance, as against which, the defendant

therein had filed a Regular Civil Suit No.44 of 2015 for declaration,

11..wp.7519.2019 Judg.odt

possession, permanent injunction and damages. An application for

clubbing both the suits was filed, in view of the fact that common issue

was raised regarding the Agreement, in question, which would require

recording of common evidence. The said application came to be rejected

by the impugned order and the Regular Civil Suit No.44 of 2015 came be

stayed under Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

4] Both the learned counsel are agreeable that since common

issue arises and common evidence would be required it would be proper

that both the suits be clubbed and tried together. In fact, when this

request was made there was no reason whatsoever for the learned Trial

Court to have rejected the application in this regard and stayed the

subsequent suit.

5] In that view of the matter, Writ Petition is allowed and the

order below Exh.1 in Regular Civil Suit No.27 of 2015 is hereby quashed

and set aside. The application at Exh.35 for clubbing both the suits is

allowed. Both these suits shall be tried together.

Rule is made absolute in above terms. No costs.

(AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J)

Sarkate.