Cr.M.M.O.No.99 of 2010. 16.03.2011 Present: Mr.R.L. Chaudhary, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.Rakesh Jaswal, Advocate, for respondents No.1 and 2. Mr.P.K. Sharma, Additional Advocate General with Ms.Shubh Mahajan, Deputy Advocate General, for respondent No.3. The petitioner challenges the order passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Mandi, dismissing a composite application under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. for investigation and registration of the FIR against the respondent as also for initiating inquiry for having committed perjury. The learned trial Court dismissed the application holding that a Civil Judge has no jurisdiction to order an inquiry under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. and composite application of the nature as filed is not maintainable. If the drafting was clumsy which, it seems from the order, that itself should not have been ground for dismissal of the application itself. The approach of the trial Court discloses a complete non-application of mind. If one or the other prayer was not maintainable, it could not be said that both the prayers made by the petitioner could not be entertained. In these circumstances, this petition is allowed. The order passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Mandi in CMA No.146-VI/2009 is quashed and set aside. It will be open to the petitioner here to move appropriate application for further proceedings in accordance with law. March 16, 2011 ( Dev Darshan Sud ) (aks) Judge