HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY CRP No.5507/2007 Date of Order: 19-11-2010 Kotha Ramachandra Rao …Petitioner V. 1.Chunduri Srirama Chandra Murthy and another ..Respondents The Court made the following: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY CRP No.5507/2007 Oral Order: This revision under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India is filed to revise the orders passed by the II Additional Senior Civil Judge, Vijayawada dt.8-10-2007 in IA No.589/2007 in IP No.18/2005, whereunder the petition filed by the revision petitioner herein under Sec.10 and 151 CPC seeking stay of proceedings in IP No.18/2005 on the ground that the matter in issue is directly and substantially in issue between the parties in OS No.45/2005 on the file of II Additional Senior Civil Judge, Vijayawada was dismissed. It is not in dispute IP No.18/2005 is filed earlier to OS No.45/2005. OS No.45/2005 is filed by the petitioner herein for recovery of the amount due under the promissory note dt. 21-4-2003 against the first respondent herein, in which he (R-1) took a plea of forgery of the promissory note. The petitioner herein also filed Insolvency Petition No.18/2005 against the respondents herein. The petitioner got referred the suit promissory note to the Private Handwriting Expert, who gave his opinion that the signature of the first respondent is forged. The petitioner also filed two applications, one to refer the promissory note to the Government Handwriting Expert and another to refer the signature of the attestor to the Handwriting Expert. On dismissal of the said petitions, the petitioner filed CRP No.1665/2007 before this court and obtained stay of trial of OS No.45/2005. Later the petitioner filed the present petition in IP No.18/2005 to stay the IP proceedings till the disposal of OS No.45/2005. The subject matter in OSNo.45/2005 is the alleged execution of the promissory note by the first respondent herein in favour of the petitioner and the suit was filed for recovery of the amount due under the pronote. Whereas in IP proceedings, the subject matter is whether the first respondent, being the debtor of the petitioner, committed any act of insolvency. Both the parties let in evidence and when the matter was coming up for arguments, the present petition has been filed to stay the IP proceedings. Since the relief claimed in IP is different from the relief claimed in the suit, and filing IP is earlier to filing of the suit, IP cannot be stayed. The discretionary order passed by the trial court does not suffer from any illegality warranting interference by this court. The Civil Revision Petition is accordingly dismissed. No costs. _______________ A.GOPAL REDDY, J. Dt.19-11-2010 Kmr