Civil Revision No. 5288 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 5288 of 2010 Date of Decision: 9.5.2011 *** Shiv Kumar Aggarwal .. Petitioner Vs. Sh. Rajinder Mohan Aggarwal & Ors. .. Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND KUMAR Present:- Mr. A.S. Barnala, Advocate for the petitioner. *** ARVIND KUMAR, J. The application of the petitioner for withdrawing and entrustment of the cases pending between the parties in different Courts, to one Court has been rejected by dint of order dated 20.4.2010 passed by learned District Judge, Ferozepur, which has been impugned in this petition. Heard. It is evident from the records that the parties are closely related to each other being brothers-sister and other relations. The dispute between them revolves around H. No. 146-P, Ferozepur Cantt., allegedly belonging to their father and mother and the parties are staking their respective claims thereupon and have sued each other in three different suits in which one is for separation possession of the aforesaid house filed by respondent No.1 against the petitioner. In the said case an application under Section 340 Cr.P.C. is pending. The second suit for the declaration in respect of the said house is filed by respondent No.3 against the petitioner and others and the third suit is for permanent injunction filed by the petitioner against respondent No.1 and others. All the aforesaid civil suits are stated to be pending before different Courts. In the considered opinion of this Court none of the parties is prejudiced if all the cases are transferred to one Court for disposal, rather it will be helpful for the Court to understand the real Civil Revision No. 5288 of 2010 2 controversy amongst the parties and adjudicate the case properly. In view of this, the instant petition is allowed and it is directed that the learned District Judge concerned shall order for transfer of all the civil suits pending between the parties to one Court for disposal in accordance with law. Keeping in view the circumstances mentioned above, this petition is being disposed of without issuing any notice to the opposite party. If respondents are summoned to contest this litigation, they will have to incur huge expenses to defend this case. However, liberty is granted to the respondents that if they feel dissatisfied with this order, they may move an application to recall the same. (ARVIND KUMAR) JUDGE May 09, 2011 Jiten