1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.4142 OF 2009 Shri Rajendra Devchand Patil, R/o-Wadi, Post-Maldabhadi, Tq-Jamner, Dist-Jalgaon. ...PETITIONER. VERSUS 1) Sau. Kalpanabai w/o Bhagwat Patil, R/o-Wadi, Post-Maldabhadi, Tq-Jamner, Dist-Jalgaon, 2) Shri Dilip Ghisulal Munot, R/o-Maldabhadi, Tq-Jamner, Dist-Jalgaon. ...RESPONDENTS. ... Mr.S.B. Yawalkar Advocate for Petitioner. Mr.V.D. Sapkal Advocate for Respondent Nos. 1 & 2. ... CORAM: K.K. TATED, J. DATE : 7TH SEPTEMBER, 2009. PER COURT : 1. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned 2 counsel for the Respondents. Present Petition filed by the Petitioner - original defendant in Regular Civil Suit No.38 of 2009 challenging the order dated 22nd May, 2009 passed by Civil Judge, Junior Division, Jamner below Exhibit 22 rejecting Petitioner - original defendant's application under Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure for stay of the hearing of Regular Civil Suit No.38 of 2009. 2. It is the case of the Petitioner that he filed Special Civil Suit No.87 of 2009 in the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Jalgaon for declaration that sale deed dated 29th March, 2005 and sale deed dated 12th March, 2009 of Gat No.72 are not binding on him and the same to be cancelled. He further submitted that the Respondent No.1 filed Regular Civil Suit No.38 of 2009 in the Court of Civil Judge, Junior Division, Jamner against the Petitioner for perpetual injunction restraining Petitioner not to interfere his possession in respect of suit property i.e. agricultural land bearing Gut No.72 admeasuring 60 R's situated at Wadi, Tq-Jamner, Dist-Jalgaon. Therefore, Petitioner filed application under Section 10 of the Code of Civil 3 Procedure for stay of further hearing of Regular Civil Suit No.38 of 2009. The Petitioner averred that he is in possession of the suit property and is cultivating the same. He averred that Respondent No.2 does business of money lending and from him Petitioner has taken loan for the marriage of his daughter and for security, he executed sale deed dated 29th March, 2005. He further averred that, he had not reconvened the disputed land and illegally transferred that land by sale deed dated 12th March, 2009 to the Respondent No.1. The said application under Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, rejected by Civil Judge, Junior Division, Jamner by order dated 22nd May, 2009. Meanwhile the Petitioner filed application under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure on 30th April, 2009 being Misc. Civil Application No.70 of 2009 before Principal District Judge, Jalgaon for transfer of Regular Civil Suit No.38 of 2009 pending before the Civil Judge, Junior Division, Jamner to the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Jalgaon before whom Special Civil Suit No.87 of 2009 is pending. In the said application, Principal District, Jalgaon passed following order on 24th June, 2009: 4 " The Civil Judge, Junior Division Jamner shall decide the application (Exh.6) for injunction in Reg. Civil Suit No.38/09 expeditiously. After the said application is decided, Reg. Civil Suit No.38/09 shall stand withdrawn from the Court of the Civil Judge, Junior Division, Jamner and shall stand transferred to the Court of 4th Jt. Civil Judge, Senior Division, Jalgaon to be tried in accordance with law, along with the Special Civil Suit No.87/09 already pending before the learned Judge." 3. It is clear from the order dated 24th June, 2009 passed by the Principal District Judge, Jalgaon below Exhibit 1 in Misc. Civil Appeal No.70 of 2009 that the Court directed to hear both the Suits i.e. Regular Civil Suit No.38 of 2009 and Special Civil Suit No.87 of 2009 by 4th Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Jalgaon except the application below Exhibit 6 for injunction in Regular Civil Suit No.38 of 2009. In view of the order dated 24th June, 2009 passed by the Principal District Judge, Jalgaon, it is not necessary to go into detail to consider whether the order passed by the Civil Judge, Junior Division, Jamner dated 2nd May, 2009 is according to law or not. Considering the order dated 24th June, 5 2009 passed below Exhibit 1 in Misc. Civil Application No.70 of 2009, I do not find any substance in the present Writ Petition and the same is dismissed summarily. [K.K. TATED, J.] asb/SEPT09/wp4142.09