ASPI JAL & ANR. versus KHUSHROO RUSTOM DADYBURJOR

ASPI JAL & ANR. versus KHUSHROO RUSTOM DADYBURJOR

Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 is not attracted unless the entire subject matter of both suits is the same. As the ground of non-user in earlier suits and the third suit relates to different periods, the suits are based on distinct causes, so Section 10 CPC does not bar the proceeding in the third suit.

Parties
Appellant: Aspi Jal; Respondent: Khushroo Rustom Dadyburjor
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
05 April 2013
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Bombay High Court's Order Affirming Stay of Proceedings by Court of Small Causes, Mumbai
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Section 10 CPC Stay of Suit, Eviction on Ground of Non User, Res Judicata

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Aspi Jal

Appellant

Khushroo Rustom Dadyburjor

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Bombay High Court's Order Affirming Stay of Proceedings by Court of Small Causes, Mumbai

  1. 1 Is Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 applicable when only some matters in issue are common between two suits?
  2. 2 Does Section 10 CPC require the entire subject matter to be the same for a stay of proceedings?

Ratio Decidendi

Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 is not attracted unless the entire subject matter of both suits is the same. As the ground of non-user in earlier suits and the third suit relates to different periods, the suits are based on distinct causes, so Section 10 CPC does not bar the proceeding in the third suit.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • The impugned order of the trial court as affirmed by the High Court is set aside.
  • No order as to costs.