find no merit therein. Suit filed by petitioner and another at Agra vide plaint Annexure P-1 does not relate to any transaction of mustard supplied by respondent to the petitioner, but relates to an independent loan transaction. In fact the said suit does not even relate to loan transaction, but relates to alleged fraud committed by respondent in obtaining cheques for the second time for the loan amount. Of course, in plaint Annexure P-1 instituted by petitioner and another at Agra, reference has been made to dealings between petitioner and respondent relating to supply of mustard by respondent to the petitioner, but the claim in plaint Annexure P-1 does not relate to any amount arising out of mustard dealings, but relates to independent transaction of Rs.20,00,000/-. On the contrary respondent has filed suit at Charkhi Dadri against the petitioner claiming balance amount of mustard supplied by respondent to the petitioner. It is thus manifest that issues directly and substantially involved in the two suits are different and distinct and not the same. Consequently, Section 10 CPC is not attracted. There is no illegality in the impugned order of the trial Court. The revision petition is devoid of any merit and is accordingly dismissed in limine.
