Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

"19. ... However, when it comes to section 10 of Civil Procedure Code, it is more than clear that one cannot lose sight of the fact that section 10 cannot be invoked by applying the tests as if the proceedings before the cooperative court filed by way of disputes are akin to a suit in a civil court. The Civil Procedure Code itself makes it clear in Part I that courts subject to the provisions contained in the Civil Procedure Code have jurisdiction to try all suits of civil nature excepting suits of which cognisance is either expressly or impliedly barred. Prior thereto sections 3 to 5 speak about applicability of Civil Procedure Code to proceedings before other courts. The proceedings may be civil in nature but that does not mean that the court trying them is a civil court and the proceedings are a "suit" within the meaning of Civil Procedure Code. A right to bring in a suit is an inherent right vested in the litigant and, therefore, while clarifying as to what would be the jurisdiction of the civil court to try suits in section 9 read with the explanation, it would at once become clear by section 10 that the court, which is a civil court, is mandated not to proceed with the trial of any suit in which the matter in issue is also directly and substantially in issue in a previously instituted suit between the same parties or between parties under whom they or any of them claim litigating under the same title where such suit is pending in the same or any other court having jurisdiction to grant the relief claimed or in any court beyond the limits of India, established or continued by the Central Government and having like jurisdiction or before the Supreme Court. The sweep of power under section 10 can by no means be read into the MCS Act and particularly section 91 to 98 thereof. The civil court's power to stay trial of subsequently instituted suits is thus available to the civil court. It is not specifically conferred on the cooperative court. That apart, in the peculiar facts of the present case, the learned Judge was in no error in rejecting the application. He has applied the principle laid down in a decision reported in AIR 2005 SC 242, National Institute of mental Health and Neuro Sciences Vs. Parameshwara. ...."