In this case a writ petition is filed for issuing mandamus against respondent to restore possession of premises to petitioner. Previously in the original suit the petition filed for mandatory injunction on the restoration of possession of premises to him was dismissed. The same premise is the subject matter of this writ petition.

The issue raised before the court is that order 2 rule 2 of code of civil procedure is applicable to writ petition?

The court observed that:

Order 2 Rule 2 read as..

Every suit includes the whole claim in respect of cause of action for which plaintiff is entitled.

If the plaintiff waives any portion of claim, he cannot afterwards claim that by filing another suit in court of law.

If the plaintiff has several reliefs for one cause of action, he can claim all of them or some of them in court of law. Afterwards he cannot claim the relief waived by him except with the leave of court.

The principle behind Order 2 rule 2 is based on public policy. A person filed suit for claiming relief in respect of cause of action is prevented from instituting another suit for claiming another relief in respect of same cause of action.

The purpose behind Order 2 rule 2 is to prevent institution of multiple suits against defendant in respect of same cause of action.

The present writ petition is dismissed as it was hit by the order 2 rule 2 of CPC.