Suman @ Seema vs Narendra @ Nanasaheb

R.M. Lodha, J.—This revision application u/s 115 of the CPC has been filed by applicant Suman aggrieved by the order dated 20-6-89 passed by the Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Amravati, rejecting the application filed by her before the said Court u/s 10 of the CPC for staying the proceedings in Hindu Marriage Petition No. 52 of 1988 filed by the non-applicant Narendra on 23-3-1988 in the said Court.

The facts of the case are that both the applicant and the non-applicant are husband and wife and matrimonial dispute arose between the parties leading to filing of divorce petition by the wife applicant, bearing Hindu Marriage Petition No. 43 of 1988 in the Court of the Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division, Amravati, on 17-3-1988 u/s 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. Subsequent to the filing of the proceedings for divorce by the wife on 17-3-1988, the non-applicant husband filed an application u/s 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for restitution of conjugal rights on 23-3-1988 in the said Court, which has been registered as Hindu Marriage Petition No. 52 of 1988.

The wife moved an application u/s 10 of the CPC contending that the subsequent proceedings filed by the husband, viz., Hindu Marriage Petition No. 52 of 1988, between the same parties be stayed.

The Trial Court by the order impugned has rejected the said application filed u/s 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, on the ground that the point for determination in two proceedings are not identical and same and, therefore, subsequent Hindu Marriage Petition No. 52 of 1988 filed by the non-applicant cannot be stayed.

Without going into the reasons given by the Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Amravati, interest of justice demands that both the proceedings should have been tried together even if the subsequent proceeding in Hindu Marriage Petition No. 52 of 1988 did not raise identical questions which have been raised by the wife in Hindu Marriage Petition No. 43 of 1988. The Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Amravati ought to have exercised its jurisdiction u/s 151 of the CPC by consolidating the two proceedings and trying both the proceedings together.

In this view of the matter, the order dated 20-6-1989 passed by the Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Amravati, is modified and the said Court is directed to consolidate both proceedings and proceed with both the proceedings in Hindu Marriage Petition Nos. 43 of 1988 and 52 of 1988 together and decide both these proceedings by a common judgment. Order accordingly.