Judgment ( 1. ) HEARD on the question of admission. ( 2. ) THIS is a revision filed under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure against the order 5-2-2004 passed in Civil Suit No. 146-A/03 by 3rd Civil Judge Class-II, Rewa, rejecting the application filed by the petitioner/ plaintiff under Section 114 of the Code of Civil Procedure read with Order 47 Rule 1 of Code of Civil Procedure for review of order dated 5-8-2003 passed on an application filed under Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure by defendant No. 1/respondent whereby the Trial Court stayed the plaintiffs suit. ( 3. ) THE petitioner/plaintiff had filed a Civil Suit No. 146-A/2003 for possession and mandatory injunction in the Court of 3rd Civil Judge, Class-II, Rewa. In the said suit the petitioner/plaintiff prayed that he purchased Khasra No. 44/1 Rakba 8 x 60 sq. ft. from respondent No. 3 Thakurdin and the defendant No. 1 has illegally constructed her house on the said land purchased by him and sought the above referred reliefs against her. ( 4. ) ON the other hand the respondent No. 1/defendant No. 1 had filed a suit in the Court of 4th Additional District Judge, Rewa for declaration of the sale-deed executed by respondent No. 3 Thakurdin in favour of the plaintiff about the same land to be null and void. ( 5. ) APPRECIATING the aforesaid averments the Trial Court found that the matter in issue pending before it is directly and substantially in issue in a suit which was previously instituted by the defendant No. 1 against the plaintiff in the Court of 4th Additional District Judge, Rewa and accordingly allowed the application filed by respondent No. 1/defendant and stayed the suit pending disposal of suit by 4th Additional District Judge, Rewa. ( 6. ) WHEN this order was sought to be reviewed by the petitioner/plaintiff, the Trial Court vide order dated 5-2-2004 rejected the said prayer for review. Hence, this revision. ( 7. ) I have perused the impugned orders passed by the Courts below. ( 6. ) WHEN this order was sought to be reviewed by the petitioner/plaintiff, the Trial Court vide order dated 5-2-2004 rejected the said prayer for review. Hence, this revision. ( 7. ) I have perused the impugned orders passed by the Courts below. In my view the learned Trial Court while considering the application filed by the respondent No. 1/defendant under Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure has rightly held that the matter in issue in the suit pending before it is also directly and substantially in issue in a suit filed by respondent No. 1/defendant No. 1 in the Court of 4th Additional District Judge, Rewa and the same was instituted prior to the present suit. It is clear that the plaintiff/petitioner is claiming his rights through the sale-deed executed by Thakurdin in his favour and in the suit instituted prior to it before the 4th Additional District Judge, Rewa the defendant prayed for declaration of the very same sale-deed to be null and void. Thus, in my considered view the Trial Court has correctly exercised the jurisdiction vested in it by law. The review of the said order has also been rightly rejected. ( 8. ) I find no error in the impugned orders. The revision, therefore, being devoid of any merits is dismissed summarily. C. C. as per rules.