Calcutta High Court: In a revisional application challenging the rejection of an application under Section 10 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC), a single-judge bench comprising of Biswaroop Chowdhury,* J., dismissed the revisional application and affirmed the order of the trial court, except for setting aside the imposed costs. The Court held that both civil and criminal proceedings can proceed simultaneously.
Brief Facts
In the instant matter, the respondent filed a money suit against the petitioner seeking recovery of Rs.9,46,000/- with interest. The petitioner contested the suit by filing a written statement. The petitioner filed an application under Section 10 CPC, seeking a stay on the grounds that the issues in a complaint case and the suit were directly and substantially the same. The trial court rejected the application under Section 10 CPC on 28-04-2023, imposing costs of Rs.5000/-. Aggrieved by the impugned order passed by the trial court. The petitioner preferred the present revisional application challenging the same.
Parties’ Contentions
The petitioner contended that the issues in the complaint case and the money suit are directly and substantially the same and rejecting the application would lead to a multiplicity of judicial proceedings. The petitioner argued that the trial court failed to exercise jurisdiction and overlooked the similarity of issues, leading to an erroneous order. The petitioner further contended that settling the matter was attempted, but the respondent refused.
The respondent contended that Section 10 CPC applies to suits, not criminal complaints, citing Vishnu Dutt Sharma v. Daya Sapra, (2009) 13 SCC 729.
Court’s Analysis
The Court examined Section 10 CPC and stated that Section 10 CPC applies to civil suits and not to other proceedings, civil or criminal, under special statutes. Referring to GSRTC v. Vimlaben, 2010 SCC OnLine Guj 5748 and Kanhaiyalal v. Dropadi, 1991 SCC OnLine MP 206, the Court stated that staying of a later suit until the decision in an earlier suit is a procedural rule and confers no legal right. The Court also relied on Vishnu Dutt Sharma (Supra) and P. Swaroopa Rani v. M. Hari Narayana, (2008) 5 SCC 765 to establish that civil and criminal proceedings can run simultaneously. The Court found no error in the trial court’s order, stating that both civil and criminal proceedings can proceed simultaneously.
The Court observed that the petitioner failed to show that the continuation of the money suit despite the pending complaint under Section 138 CrPC is an abuse of process or that the plaintiff obtained relief in the complaint case.
Court’s Decision
The Court dismissed the revisional application, affirming the impugned order dated 28-04-2023, with costs set aside. The Court clarified that it has not delved into the merits of the case, leaving all points open for further consideration. The Court further encouraged the parties to settle the dispute through proper legal channels if they wish to do so.
[Ananda Mohan Roy v. Kanchana Mukhopadhyay, 2023 SCC OnLine Cal 5476, order dated 21-12-2023]
*Judgment by Justice Biswaroop Chowdhury
Advocates who appeared in this case :
Mr. Sibasis Ghosh, Mr. Biswabrata Baso Mallick, Mr. Dwarik Nath Mukherjee and Mr. Deb Kumar Deashi, Counsel for the Petitioners
Mr. Chayan Gupta, Mr. Saptarshi Mal, Mr. Kaushik De and Ms. Mohini Majumder, Counsel for the Opposite Party
