1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 2524 OF 2008 (Sadhu Manjani vs. Rajkumar Sahajwani & Anr.) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. OCTOBER 01, 2008. Heard Shri Gharote, learned counsel for the petitioner i.e. Plaintiff in Special Civil Suit No. 596 of 1996 and Akash Raut, learned counsel for the respondents, who are plaintiffs in Civil Suit No. 273 of 1999. The first Civil Suit is filed by present petitioner for declaration that cheque was stolen from him by the respondents and was likely to be misused. Second suit is filed by the respondents against the present petitioner for specific performance of contract and in it, it is the contention of present petitioner that agreement has been fabricated on a stamp which was stolen from him by the respondents. On the basis of cheque which forms subject matter of Civil Suit No. 596 of 1996, after its dishonour, Criminal Complaint Case No. 568 of 1996 was filed under Section 138 of Negotiable 2 Instrument Act and upon its rejection, the respondent cheque holder has approached this Court in Criminal Appeal No. 126 of 2003. In view of this development, the respondents have filed application earlier for staying both Civil Suits and that was rejected. Thereafter, the succeeding judicial officer, after noticing these events, suo motu has passed impugned order on 18.3.2008. Shri Gharote, learned counsel contends that the suits must be allowed to continue. Shri Raut, learned counsel though states that the subject matter is different, his argument is that adjudication in Criminal Appeal is definitely bound to have bearing on civil adjudication. I find that presently the adjudication of Criminal Appeal has got no effect whatsoever on adjudication of civil liabilities between the parties. After the appeal is decided, the effect thereof can be appropriately evaluated in accordance with law by the Competent Court before whom the Civil proceedings may then be pending. The observations in the impugned order that the findings of High Court can straightway be applied to civil dispute are only prima facie and shall not influence the Court while considering the controversy on merits. The Court below has found that as the matter is pending 3 before the High Court, it cannot proceed further with the mater. The reason put forth is incorrect. The impugned order is, therefore, quashed and set aside. 5th Joint Civil Judge, Senior Judge, Nagpur, to proceed further with the trial of both suits in accordance with law. Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. JUDGE *GS.