THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY Civil Revision Petition No.5822 of 2010 ORDER: Respondents 1 to 8 herein filed Creditors I.P.No.14 of 2009 in the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Marakpur against the petitioner and respondents 9 and 10. The petitioner figured as respondent No.2. He filed the I.A. 110 of 2010 under Section 10 of C.P.C., with a prayer to stay the proceedings in the I.P. The ground pleaded by him is that the I.P. schedule debts covered those referable to the decrees in O.S.Nos.48 and 374 of 2000 on the file of the learned Principal Junior Civil Judge, Markapur and that he has filed applications to set aside the ex parte decrees passed therein. The petitioner further pleaded that as long as the applications for setting aside the ex parte decrees are pending, the further proceedings in the I.P. cannot take lace. Respondents 1 to 8 opposed the application. The trial Court dismissed the I.A. through order, dated 05.10.2010. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for respondents 1 to 8. Basically Section 10 of C.P.C. provides for stay of subsequent suits, when the earlier suits filed on the same subject matter are pending before different Courts. That is not the case here. What is sought to be stayed is the I.P. and those that are said to be pending are applications filed under Order 9 Rule 13 C.P.C. or the applications for condonation of delay. Therefore, Section 10 of C.P.C. does not get attracted at all. Secondly, the subject matter of the I.P. is not the decrees in those suits alone. It covers some other debts. Viewed from any angle, the application filed by the petitioner cannot be sustained in law. The trial Court has taken correct view of the matter. The civil revision petition is accordingly is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. __________ 18.08.2011 JSU THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY Civil Revision Petition No.5822 of 2010 Date: 18.08.2011 JSU