Shrimati Pushpa Devi and Others vs Sajjan Kumar and Another

Alok Singh, J.—Learned Counsel for the Petitioners states that earlier Plaintiffs/Petitioners have filed suit for permanent prohibitory injunction against the Defendants/Respondents and in the previously instituted suit for permanent prohibitory injunction Defendants have placed on record sale deed dated 12.03.1982. In a suit for permanent prohibitory injunction, Plaintiffs have challenged the sale deed dated 12.03.1982 and have already been permitted by the trial Court to get the disputed signatures on the sale deed examined with the specimen signatures through the handwriting expert. Learned Counsel for the Petitioners further states that thereafter Plaintiffs had filed another subsequent suit for declaration challenging the same very sale deed dated 12.03.1982. Learned Counsel for the Petitioners further states that in the present second suit permission to compare the disputed signatures with the specimen signatures through the handwriting expert has been declined. Learned Counsel for the Petitioners further states that since in both the suits subject-matter i.e. sale deed in question is same and parties are the same, hence Plaintiffs can move an appropriate application before the trial Court, to avoid conflicting judgments in two suits, to consolidate the suits and to decide the suits by common judgment. Learned Counsel for the Petitioners further states that in the event of consolidation of both the suits, evidence available on one file shall also be read in another file. In view of this, learned Counsel for the Petitioners seeks permission to withdraw this petition with liberty to move application before the trial Court for consolidation of the suits.

Petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the Petitioners to move an appropriate application before the trial Court for consolidation of both the suits. In the event of moving such application, learned Court below shall pass appropriate order thereon in accordance with law.