Decided on May 26,2020

AMAR NATH Appellant
NANAK CHAND Respondents


JYOTSNA REWAL DUA,J. - (1.)Petitioner's application seeking transfer of his case, pending consideration before learned trial Court to another Court, has been dismissed by learned District Judge, Hamirpur, on 29.01.2020, hence instant petition has been preferred.
2(i). A Civil Suit No.929/2015, titled as Amar Nath versus Nanak Chand, is pending adjudication before learned Civil Judge, Court No.3, Hamirpur (H.P.). Petitioner is being represented in the said case by a learned Legal-aid-Counsel appointed for him.

2(ii). During a hearing of the above mentioned case held on 31.12.2019, learned counsel for the petitioner was absent before learned trial Court, however, the petitioner remained present in person on the date. The matter was adjourned by learned Presiding Officer to 20.01.2020 on the request made by petitioner in person.

2(iii). The petitioner moved an application to learned District Judge, Hamirpur, seeking transfer of his case, pending before learned trial Court, to any other Court. The transfer was sought on the allegation that on 31.12.2019, learned Presiding Officer had declined to adjourn the matter and ordered the petitioner to argue the case in person. Therefore, it was apprehended that he will not get justice from the Court concerned and accordingly, prayer was made for transfer of his pending case to any other Court.

2(iv). Learned District Judge called for the comments of the Presiding Officer, who in her response, submitted that:-there was no occasion to get annoyed with the petitioner; no comments on merit of the case were made on 31.12.2019 and the petitioner's request for adjourning the matter on account of absence of his counsel was accepted by adjourning the matter to 20.01.2020. The petitioner as well as his counsel both appeared before learned Presiding Officer on the date fixed. Learned District Judge on receipt of the above comments, held that the petitioner had failed to establish his apprehension of not getting justice from learned trial Court and accordingly dismissed the application vide order dated 29.01.2020. Feeling aggrieved, the instant petition has been preferred against the impugned order.

(3.)I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner, through video conference and gone through appended record. Taking into consideration the facts, circumstances of the case and the order impugned herein, no notice is required to be issued to the respondent.
3(i). The factual allegation leveled in the application seeking transfer of the case is in respect of hearing held on 31.12.2019 before learned Presiding Officer. The allegation is to the effect that request for adjournment of case on 31.12.2019 was not accepted by learned Presiding Officer; petitioner was asked to argue his case himself by the Presiding Officer in absence of his counsel and further that learned Presiding Officer threatened of delivering an adverse decision in case the matter was not argued by the petitioner.

Learned District Judge in his order dated 29.01.2020 (impugned herein) has taken note of the actual order passed on 31.12.2019 by learned Presiding Officer, whereby the matter was only adjourned to 20.01.2020 on the request of petitioner. This factual position has not been disputed before me. Therefore, the factual allegation levelled against the Presiding Officer by the petitioner is incorrect.

3(ii). Section 24 of Code of Civil Procedure prescribes general power of transfer and withdrawal of cases in the following manner:-

"24. General power of transfer and withdrawal. -

(1) On the application of any of the parties and after notice to the parties and after hearing such of them as desired to be heard, or of its own motion without such notice, the High Court or the District Court may at any stage-f

(a) transfer any suit, appeal or other proceeding pending before it for trial or disposal to any Court subordinate to it and competent to try or dispose of the same, or

(b) withdraw any suit, appeal or other proceeding pending in any Court subordinate to it, and (i) try or dispose of the same; or

(ii) transfer the same for trial or disposal to any Court subordinate to it and competent to try or dispose of the same; or

(iii) retransfer the same for trial or disposal to the Court from which it was withdrawn.

(2) Where any suit or proceeding has been transferred or withdrawn under sub-section (1), the Court which [is thereafter to try or dispose of such suit or proceeding] may, subject to any special directions in the case of an order of transfer, either retry it or proceed from the point at which it was transferred or withdrawn.

[(3) For the purposes of this section,-

(a) Courts of Additional and Assistant Judges shall be deemed to be subordinate to the District Court;

(b) "proceeding" includes a proceeding for the execution of a decree or order]

(4) The Court trying any suit transferred or withdrawn under this section from a Court of Small Causes shall, for the purposes of such suit, be deemed to be a Court of Small Causes.

[(5) A suit or proceeding may be transferred under this section from a Court which has no jurisdiction to try it] ...."


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.