ORDER 1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners defendants feeling aggrieved by order dated 03.08.2019, whereby application filed by the petitioners under Section 10 CPC has been dismissed. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that a suit for declaration and permanent injunction has been filed by the respondents and in the same suit, prayer has also been made to declare the plaintiffs as owner of the land. 3. Learned counsel submitted that the other suit of eviction and arrears of rent has been filed against the present petitioners. 4. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioners pleaded before the Court below that proceedings in the suit for eviction and recovery of rent was required to be stayed, as the main dispute between the parties about entitlement of the property was sub-judice and the parties were same in both the suits and as such, the Court was required to consider the lis between the parties and as such, the Court below while passing the order dated 03.08.2019 has committed an error in rejecting the application. 5. Learned counsel submitted that an application filed under Section 10 CPC was also filed in another suit of eviction and arrears of rent and same was also rejected and as such, the Court has decided to proceed further in the matter in both the suits. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the material available on record. 7. This Court finds that the Court below while passing the order dated 03.08.2019 has taken into account the prayers made in both the suits and the nature of dispute between the parties. 8. The Court below has come to conclusion that the suit filed for eviction of the present petitioners and further for recovery of rent, has no connection with the other suit which was filed for declaration. 9. The Court below has rightly come to conclusion that as far as the dispute in a suit relating to eviction and arrears of rent was concerned, the same was to be decided on the basis of tenant-landlord relation and as such, the other issues, which might come before the consideration in a suit for declaration, had no relevance for deciding the suit in which stay of proceedings was sought by the petitioners. 10. 10. This Court finds that the Court below has rightly come to conclusion that both the suits are not interlinked in any manner and as such, the application filed by the petitioners has rightly been rejected. 11. Accordingly, this Court finds no force in the present writ petition and as such, the same is dismissed.