Sanatan Mondal and Anr. Vs Ananda Mondal and Anr. — Calcutta HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Sanatan Mondal and Anr. Vs Ananda Mondal and Anr. — Calcutta HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

The revisional application challenging the rejection of the Section 10 stay application was disposed of with directions: the learned District Judge, Hooghly to transmit the records of either suit to one of the courts concerned, and the transferee court to try the two suits analogously and dispose of them expeditiously; no order as to costs.

Issue for consideration

Whether the learned trial Court erred in rejecting the petitioner's application under Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure for stay of Title Suit No. 314 of 2022 despite the pendency of the earlier Title Suit No. 43 of 2011, and how the two pending suits should proceed.

Court's answer

With Title Suit No. 43 of 2011 pending before the Civil Judge (Junior Division), 3rd Court, Serampore, Hooghly and Title Suit No. 314 of 2022 pending before the Civil Judge (Junior Division), 4th Court, Serampore, Hooghly, this Court held that justice would be served if both the suits are tried analogously.

Ratio / Principle

The learned District Judge, Hooghly was directed to transmit the records of either of the suits to one of the courts in which one of the cases is pending, and the learned transferee Court was to decide the two suits analogously and attempt to dispose of them as expeditiously as possible.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Civil revision — rejection of application under Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure for stay of Title Suit No. 314 of 2022 on the plea that the earlier Title Suit No. 43 of 2011, involving the same parties and a similar cause of action, should be disposed of first — the trial court had held the matters in the two suits were not identical — this Court, noting that the two suits stood pending before different courts at Serampore, Hooghly (3rd Court and 4th Court, Civil Judge (Junior Division)), took the view that justice would be served by trying both suits analogously and accordingly directed the learned District Judge, Hooghly to transmit the records of either suit to one of the courts in which one of the cases was pending; the transferee court to decide the two suits analogously and dispose of them as expeditiously as possible — revisional application disposed of; no order as to costs. Parties to act on server copy of the order.

17.11.2025 Sl. No. 50 Ct No. 6 SG

CO 1660 of 2025

Sri Sanatan Mondal & Anr. Vs

Sri Ananda Mondal & Anr.

Mr. Subhendu Bandyopadhyay,

Mr. Arinam Mitra.

…for the petitioners

Mr. Tanmoy Mukherjee, Mr. Souvik Das, Mr. K.R. Ahmed, Mr. T. Chatterjee, Mr. R. Das.

…for the opposite party

The petitioner is aggrieved by an order dated November 28, 2024 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), 4^th Court, Serampore, Hooghly in Title Suit No. 314 of 2022. By the order impugned the learned Court rejected an application filed by the petitioner under Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The petitioner prayed for stay of all further proceedings in Title Suit No. 314 of 2022 as it was contended that the suit was between the same parties and on a similar cause of action as Title Suit No. 43 of 2011. Title Suit No. 43 of 2011 being a prior suit should be disposed of first.

According to the learned Court, the matters in the two suits were not identical and the question of grant of stay of the subsequent suit did not arise.

2

The petitioner contends that the learned Court erred in not taking into account that the decision in the subsequent suit would have a bearing in the previous suit and as such the previous suit should be allowed to continue upon granting stay of the subsequent suit.

Having considered the rival contentions of the parties, this Court finds that, Title Suit No. 43 of 2011 is pending before the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), 3^rd Court, Serampore, Hooghly and Title Suit No. 314 of 2022 is pending before the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), 4^th Court, Serampore, Hooghly. In my opinion, justice would be served if both the suits are tried analogously.

Under such circumstances, the learned District Judge, Hooghly is directed to transmit the records of either of the suits to one of the courts in which one of the cases is pending and thereafter the learned transferee Court shall decide the two suits analogously and make attempts to dispose of the same as expeditiously as possible.

Accordingly, this revisional application is disposed

of.

There shall be no order as to costs.

Parties are to act on the server copy of this order.

(Shampa Sarkar, J.)