IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA WRIT PETITION NO. 635 OF 2008 SHAMBHU PUNDALIK PRABHU DESAI ... Petitioner Versus HEIRS OF GANESH YESSO ... Respondent Mr. R. G. Ramani,Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Vivek Rodrigues, Advocate for the 6a To 6e, 7, 8a To 8i & 4. Mr. S.D. Padiyar, Advocate for the respondent Nos.5a, 5c to 5k. Coram:- C. L. PANGARKAR, J. Date:- 18th February, 2009 P.C. 1. Heard the Counsel for the petitioner and the respondents. 2. This writ petition has been preferred against the order passed by the learned Judge of the Trial Court whereby he in fact rejected the application for clubbing two cases together being L.A.C. No.78/1999 and 92/1999. The learned Judge, after hearing the parties, not only did not club the matter but passed an order staying the trial in L.A.C. No.92/1999. 3. The learned Counsel for the respondents, submits that as far as the order of the Trial Court staying the proceedings in L.A.C. No.92/1999 is concerned, that is apparently not correct. In view of this statement, the order passed by the learned Judge of the Trial Court staying the L.A.C. No.92/1999, is set aside. Section 10 of C.P.C. did not apply in the case because Section 10 applies where there is previous suit pending and the decision therein would act as res-judicata. In the circumstances, no such question of staying the suit arises. In view of this, the order passed by the Judge, is set aside. 4. With the consent of the parties, following order is now passed : The present petitioner shall file an affidavit in examination-in-chief before the Trial Court in L.A.C. No.78/1999. If at all the respondents want this petitioner for cross-examination, the petitioner shall make himself available for the purpose of cross-examination by respondent Nos.6a To 6e, 7, 8a To 8i & 4. The petitioner is at liberty to file pursis before the Trial Court. The Trial Court to read the documents that are already filed by the petitioner in L.A.C. No.92/1999 to which the respondents have no objection. The Trial Court shall thereafter decide both the matters by separate judgment at a time. All parties are at liberty to tender evidence in L.A.C. No.92/1999. With these observations, the petition stands disposed of. C. L. PANGARKAR, J. SMA