Judgment :- 1. The petitioners/petitioners/plaintiffs have filed this civil revision petition against the order dated 112. 2007 in I.A.No.1551 of 2007 in O.S.No.355 of 2004 passed by the District Munsif Court, Udumalpet in dismissing the application filed under Section 10 of Civil Procedure Code. 2. The trial Court, while passing orders in I.A.No.1551 of 2007, has inter alia opined that the two suits viz., O.S.No.241 of 1999 and O.S.No.355 of 2004 are totally different and that parties are different and the reliefs prayed for also different and has resultantly, dismissed the application. 3. The learned counsel for the revision petitioners submits that the order passed by the trial Court in dismissing the I.A.No.1551 of 2007 under Section 10 of Civil Procedure Code to stay the trial of O.S.No.355 of 2004 pending on the file of District Munsif Court, Udumalpet till the disposal of A.S.No.61 of 2007 pending on the file of District Court, Coimbatore is against law and the facts and circumstances of the case and that the trial Court has not taken note of the fact that the suit properties are identical in nature and that parties are the same and in both the suits the same title is involved and therefore, prays for allowing the civil revision petition in the interest of justice. 4. Contending contra, the learned counsel for the first respondent submits that the reliefs prayed for in O.S.No.355 of 2004 and O.S.No.241 of 1999 are totally different and that I.A.No.2233 of 2004 has been filed by the first respondent herein in O.S.No.355 of 2004 and that a counter has been filed by the petitioners/plaintiffs to the effect that the reliefs prayed for in both the suits and the suit properties are different and after contest, the same has been dismissed by the trial Court and inasmuch as the reliefs prayed for in the suits O.S.No.241 of 1999 and O.S.No.355 of 2004 are totally different, there is no need to allow the interlocutory application filed under Section 10 of Civil Procedure Code and the trial Court has assigned proper reasons while dismissing the I.A.No.1551 of 2007 and at this stage, this Court may not interfere with the same. 5. It is to be noted that the ingredients of Section 10 of Civil Procedure Code will apply when a decision in one suit will non-suit the other suit. 5. It is to be noted that the ingredients of Section 10 of Civil Procedure Code will apply when a decision in one suit will non-suit the other suit. In that event, only it can be said that the matter in issue both the suits are directly and substantially the same. In case of two suits between the same parties when the facts clearly disclose and also establish that they are distinct and separate, there is no identity at all in regard to the cause of action and also the reliefs that are projected in both the suits and therefore, the provisions of Section 10 of Civil Procedure Code are inapplicable, in the considered opinion of this Court. 6. In O.S.No.355 of 2004 the revision petitioners/plaintiffs have sought a relief of declaration and consequent injunction. In O.S.No.241 of 1999 has been filed by the first respondent herein on the file of Sub Court, Udumalpet for partition and on 28.02.2007 a preliminary decree has been passed. As against the said preliminary decree A.S.No.61 of 2007 has been filed before the District Court, Coimbatore and the same is pending. Even though some of the parties in O.S.No241 of 1999 and in O.S.No.355 of 2004 do figure in those proceedings yet the reliefs prayed for in the said two suits are totally different and they are not identical, in the considered opinion of this Court and in that view of the matter, the civil revision petition fails and the same is hereby dismissed. In the result, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. The order passed by the trial Court in I.A.No.1551 of 2007 is affirmed for the reasons assigned by this Court in this revision. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is also dismissed.