THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.4325 OF 2010 ORDER: The petitioners are the defendants in O.S.No.53 of 2009 on the file of the Court of Junior Civil Judge, Anaparthy. They filed I.A.No.330 of 2010 under Order II Rule 3 and Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC), praying the Court to club the said suit with another suit being O.S.No.18 of 2010 for conducting joint trial. The application was rejected on 06.09.2010. Aggrieved thereby, the present CRP is filed. This Court ordered notice to respondent on 01.01.2010 and permitted the counsel for the petitioners to take out personal notice. The counsel submits that when the notice was taken out by registered post acknowledgment due (RLAD A 6954 dated 04.10.2010), the said postal cover was returned by the postal authorities with endorsement “Refused”. The returned postal cover is placed before this Court and made part of the record. In view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in C.C.Alavihaji v. Palapetty Muhammed [1], when notice sent by registered post to the party is returned with endorsement ‘refused, it shall be deemed to have been served in view of Section 27 of the General Clauses Act, 1897. Further under Order V Rule 9 (5) CPC, when the defendant refused to accept the notice, it shall be deemed to have been duly served on the defendant. Therefore, this Court declares and records that the respondent is duly served. The brief fact of the matter as summarised in the impugned order is as follows. The respondent filed O.S.No.53 of 2009 for permanent injunction. The petitioners then filed O.S.No.18 of 2010 for declaration and perpetual injunction. In both the suits, the plaint schedule property is the same. Therefore, the rejection of the request to club both the suits is rather curious. The learned trial Court rejected the request only on the ground that parties are different. Even if the parties are different, there cannot be any objection because it would avoid multiplicity of trials and inconsistent judgments. In view of the above, this Civil Revision Petition is allowed. The order passed by the trial court in I.A.No.330 of 2010 dated 06.09.2010 shall stand reversed and set aside. The said I.A. is allowed, directing the Court below to club O.S.No.53 of 2009 and O.S.No.18 of 2010 on its file and conduct common trial duly recording the evidence in O.S.No.18 of 2010. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 14th December 2011 RRB [1] (2007) 6 SCC 555