C.R. No.232 of 2010 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R. No.232 of 2010 Date of Decision: 01.11.2010 Joginder Singh and others ……Petitioners VERSUS Hakam Singh and others ……Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH -.- Present: Mr. Arvind Bansal, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Abhinav Oberoi, Advocate for the respondents. 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? Yes 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes ALOK SINGH, J. (ORAL) 1. Present petition is filed challenging the order dated 14.10.2009 passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Rajpura, whereby the Suit No.281/2004 titled as Joginder Singh and others vs. Hakam Singh and others was directed to be stayed under Section 10 C.P.C. during the pendency of the previously instituted suit between the parties i.e. Suit No.351/2004 titled as Ramdasia Dharamshala C.R. No.232 of 2010 -2- Management Committee, Village Mehmoodpur vs. Joginder Singh and others. 2. Both the suits are stated to be pending in the same Court. In the previously instituted suit, plaintiffs-respondents have sought permanent prohibitory injunction over the property shown in the map by words ‘ABCD’ stating the property to be a part of Khasra No.74 while in the previously instituted suit, present petitioners-defendants (plaintiffs of the previously instituted suit) sought injunction over the same property treating it as part of Khasra No.75. 3. Having heard learned Counsel for the parties and having perused the record, I find that in both the suits the main controversy would be, as to whether property in dispute is a part of Khasra No.74 or Khasra No.75. This controversy can be resolved by way of Survey Commission and by placing relevant evidence before the learned trial Court. The object of Section 10 C.P.C. is to avoid conflicting deci- sions in two suits instituted by the parties against each other pertain- ing to the same subject matter. The second object of Section 10 C.P.C. is that subsequently instituted suit shall be barred by principle of res judicata from the judgment passed in the previously instituted suit. To avoid conflicting judgments and to decide the lis pending be- tween the parties in one go, in the opinion of this Court it would be appropriate to direct the learned trial Court to hear both the suits to- gether by consolidating the same and to decide both the suits by one C.R. No.232 of 2010 -3- and common judgment making previously instituted suit as a leading case. 4. Present petition is disposed of with the direction that learned trial Court shall hear both the suits together by consolidating the same and by making previously instituted suit as a leading case. Parties shall appear before the learned trial Court on 13.11.2010 for further direction. ( ALOK SINGH ) 01st November, 2010 JUDGE ashish