16.06.2025 Ct. 1 D/L 5 ab CALCUTTA HIGH COURT IN THE CIRCUIT BENCH AT JALPAIGURI APPELLATE SIDE C.O. 184 of 2024 Basudeb Roy & Ors. -Vs- Prafulla Ch. Roy Mr. Bikramaditya Ghosh, Ms. Ved Rai, Mr. Vivek Saha ... for the petitioners Mr. Hirak Barman, Mr. Chandan Roy … for the opposite party This revisional application arises out of an order dated 9th September, 2024 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), 1st Court at Jalpaiguri in Title Suit no. 84 of 2023 by which the application filed under Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 by the opposite party was allowed. It is the case of the petitioners that the opposite party filed a suit being Title Suit no. 213 of 2022 seeking declaration, injunction and consequential reliefs in respect of an immovable property described in the Schedule of the plaint. The plaint filed in the said Title Suit no. 213 of 2022 is annexed at page 27 of this revisional application. The petitioners say that in 2 respect of the self-same suit property, the petitioners have instituted a suit for declaration, injunction and consequential reliefs on the ground that the petitioners are the rightful owners of the suit property and opposite party is infringing their legal character and rights. The petitioners also say that the opposite party in his suit obtained an ex parte ad interim order of injunction but did not comply with the provisions of Order XXXIX Rule 3 of CPC. In any event, the petitioner nos. 2 and 3 were not a party to the suit being Title Suit No. 213 of 2022 when the same was initially instituted. Only the petitioner no. 1 was a party. It is also the case of the petitioners that after coming to know of the suit (Title Suit No. 84 of 2023) filed by the petitioners, the opposite party made an application for adding the petitioner nos. 2 and 3 as parties to the said suit being Title Suit no. 213 of 2022. On being added as party- defendants, the opposite party got the order of injunction extended against the petitioner nos. 2 and 3 apart from that which was existing against the petitioner no. 1. In this background, the opposite party filed an application under Section 10 of the CPC for staying of the Title Suit no. 84 of 2023 filed by the petitioners. The said application was allowed by the order impugned. Being aggrieved by the said order, petitioners have challenged the same by filing the instant revisional application. 3 On behalf of the opposite party, it is submitted that the learned Trial Court has assigned reasons for allowing the application filed under Section 10 of CPC after considering the facts of the two cases. The opposite party also disputes the contentions of the petitioners regarding their ownership and legal character of the suit property. Admittedly, the suit filed by the opposite party (Title Suit No. 213 of 2022) is prior in time. It is also an admitted position that two suits relate to the same immovable property. The opposite party is claiming declaration of its right, title and interest in his suit (Title Suit No. 213 of 2022) in respect of the property against which petitioners are also seeking declaration and injunction in their suit (Title Suit No. 84 of 2023). The case of the petitioners in their suit, therefor, will be the defence of the petitioners as defendants in the suit filed by the opposite party (Title Suit no. 213 of 2022). The issues therefore, in both the suits will be identical. Moreover, the decision in a first suit, if it goes in favour of the opposite party will non-suit the petitioners and at the same time, if the petitioners succeed in resisting the claim of the opposite party in the said suit being Title Suit no. 213 of 2022, the contentions of the petitioners in their suit will be upheld. In the facts and circumstances as aforesaid, I do not find any infirmity in the order impugned. However, 4 in order to prevent complication and multiplicity of the judicial proceedings, I direct that the two suits being Title Suit no. 213 of 2022 and Title Suit no. 84 of 2023 be heard analogously since the said two suits are before the same Court. Interim order directing the stay of all further proceedings in connection with Title Suit no. 84 of 2023 stands vacated. Nothing further remains to be adjudicated in this revisional application. The same is accordingly disposed of. ( Arindam Mukherjee, J.)