IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR ORDER IN S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.4826/2004 Public Carrier Truck Owners Association, Aklera Versus Mangi Lal S/o Birdhi Lal and Others Date of Order ::: 09.04.2008 Present Hon'ble Mr. Justice Narendra Kumar Jain Shri R.P. Vijay, Counsel for petitioner Shri Sanjay Mehrishi and Shri Chetan Jain, Counsel for respondents #### By the Court:- Heard learned counsel for the parties. The plaintiff-petitioner filed a suit for specific performance of the agreement in the trial court wherein nine issues were framed. The Issue No.5 was as to whether a revenue suit is pending before the revenue court in respect of same disputed land and, therefore, the present suit is not maintainable. The trial court decided the issue No.5 vide impugned order dated 10th March, 2004 in favour of the defendants and directed that proceedings of the present suit will remain stayed till the disposal of the revenue suit No.1526/1997 pending before the Sub Divisional Officer, Aklera. The said order has been impugned in this writ petition. I have heard the learned counsel for both the parties and, after considering their submissions in the light of reasons assigned by the trial court in the impugned order dated 10th March, 2004, I do not find any legal or factual error in the said order so as to interfere in the same while exercising the extra- ordinary jurisdiction of this court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. There is no merit in this writ petition and the same is accordingly dismissed. (Narendra Kumar Jain) J. //Jaiman// IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR ORDER IN S.B. Civil Misc. Stay Application No.4110/2004 In S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.4826/2004 Public Carrier Truck Owners Association, Aklera Versus Mangi Lal S/o Birdhi Lal and Others Date of Order ::: 09.04.2008 Present Hon'ble Mr. Justice Narendra Kumar Jain Shri R.P. Vijay, Counsel for petitioner Shri Sanjay Mehrishi and Shri Chetan Jain, Counsel for respondents #### By the Court:- Consequent upon dismissal of the writ petition itself, the stay application, filed therewith, does not survive and the same is also dismissed. (Narendra Kumar Jain) J. //Jaiman//