https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199068 Section 10 CPC did not apply to stay rent control proceedings because such proceedings before the Rent Controller are not suits, the Rent Controller is not a court of concurrent jurisdiction, and the eviction issues were not directly and substantially the same as the partition dispute. Section 151 CPC also could not be used to create a stay contrary to the statutory scheme. Where the rent control legislation prescribes a special procedure for dealing with denial of the landlord's title, that procedure is mandatory and excludes general civil procedure. The Andhra Pradesh HC therefore treated the statutory mechanism as controlling and required the Rent Controller to proceed under the special Act. en-us Fri, 16 Jul 1971 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 19 Feb 2018 14:11:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199068 Section 10 CPC did not apply to stay rent control proceedings because such proceedings before the Rent Controller are not suits, the Rent Controller is not a court of concurrent jurisdiction, and the eviction issues were not directly and substantially the same as the partition dispute. Section 151 CPC also could not be used to create a stay contrary to the statutory scheme. Where the rent control legislation prescribes a special procedure for dealing with denial of the landlord's title, that procedure is mandatory and excludes general civil procedure. The Andhra Pradesh HC therefore treated the statutory mechanism as controlling and required the Rent Controller to proceed under the special Act. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 16 Jul 1971 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199068