Anil vs Babulal

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner aggrieved against order dated 13.01.2020 passed by the Appellate Court, whereby, the application filed by the petitioner for consolidation of the appeal with the pending suit has been rejected.

A suit for possession under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 and in the alternative based on title was filed by respondent. The suit was

decreed on 22.07.2011.

Aggrieved by the same, an appeal was filed, which is pending before the Court of Additional District Judge, Sujangarh. Subsequent thereto, a suit came to be filed by sister of petitioner and respondent seeking partition of the property in question, which is also pending before the said Court.

During pendency of the appeal and the suit, the present application was filed by the petitioner-defendant in the suit seeking consolidation of both the

proceedings.

The Appellate Court by its order dated 13.01.2020 came to the conclusion that the suit as well as appeal cannot be consolidated and the petitioner could not cite any law in this regard. Further it also came to the conclusion that the pleadings, cause of action, issues, defence and evidence in both the matters are different and, therefore, the prayer cannot be granted and consequently, rejected the application.

Learned counsel for the petitioner made submissions that as the appeal is continuation of the suit, the rejection of prayer by the Appellate Court is not justified as the suit as well as the appeal is pending before the same Court.

Further submissions have been made that looking to the nature of appeal and the pending suit, the Appellate Court be directed to decide both the appeal as well as the suit together and the appeal may not be decided prior to the suit as the same would prejudice the case of the petitioner.

I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and have perused the material available on record.

Insofar as the plea raised by learned counsel for the petitioner that as the appeal is continuation of the suit and there is no bar in consolidating both the proceedings is concerned, the same has apparently no basis.

The principle that the appeal is continuation of the suit cannot be employed for the purpose of getting consolidation as in appeal the only requirement is to hear and decide the same, whereas, the suit is required to proceed through various stages i.e. pleadings, issues, evidence and thereafter it reaches the stage of judgment and, therefore, there is no question of consolidating both the proceedings.

Insofar as the second prayer pertaining to a direction to the Court to decide both the proceedings together is concerned, looking to the nature of proceedings and the fact that the appeal is pending for over eight years now, the prayer in this regard cannot be accepted.

In view thereof, the plea raised regarding decision of both the suits together also has no substance.

In view of above discussion, the writ petition filed by the petitioner has no substance, the same is, therefore, dismissed.