IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (M/S) No. 729 of 2009 Sunil Kumar and others ……. Petitioners Versus Dharm Prakash …….. Respondents …………………………. Sri Ghanshyam Joshi Advocate, holding brief for Sri Arvind Vashisth, learned counsel for the petitioners. Sri B.P. Nautiyal, learned counsel for the respondent. Date: June 09, 2009. Hon’ble B.S.Verma,J. By means of this petition, the petitioner has sought certiorari for quashing the order dated 02.01.2009 passed by District Judge, Udham Singh Nagar in Civil Revision No.37 of 2008, Sudhir Kumar & others Vs. Dharm Prakash and order dated 09.05.2008 passed by Civil Judge (Junior Division), Kashipur in Original Suit No.265 of 2007, Dharm Prakash Vs.Sudhir Kumar and others, by which the application (18-C) under Section 10 of Civil Procedure Code moved by the petitioners. 2. In the suit proceeding, which is pending between the parties, the petitioners moved an application (18-C) under Section 10 C.P.C. The respondent also filed objection (21-C) against the said application. The trial court rejected the application of petitioners on the ground that the revision case is pending before the Deputy Director, Consolidation. The court of Deputy Director Consolidation is a Consolidation Court and Section 10 of C.P.C. provides that no Court shall proceed with the trial of any suit in which the matter in issue is also directly and substantially in issue in a previously instituted suit between the same parties, or 2 between parties under whom they or any of them claim litigating under the same title where such suit is pending in the same or any other Court in India having jurisdiction to grant the relief claimed, or in any Court beyond the limits of India established or continued by the Central Government and having like jurisdiction, or before the Supreme Court. 3. I have perused the orders impugned. There is no perversity in the impugned orders. Since the Court of Deputy Director, Consolidation is a Consolidation Court and settlement proceedings are going on, the proceedings in the suit before the Civil Court can not be stayed on the ground that the case between the parties is pending before the Consolidation Court. 4. The writ petition is dismissed in limine. (Miscellaneous application No.3864/2009 also stands dismissed.) (B.S.Verma,J.) 09.06.2009 P.Singh