Case Title:
H K Suma Vs M Santhosh
Date of Order:
September 13, 2022
Bench:
Honourable Mr.Justice E.S Indiresh
Parties:
Petitioner- Smt. H. K Suma
Respondent – M Santhosh
SUBJECT
This Civil Petition was filed under Section 24 of Code of Civil Procedure praying to transfer the case pending before the Additional Principal Judge, Family Court,Bangalore, to the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Doddaballapura. The Court held that it is not inconvenience of the parties but the hardship that would cause to the parties that should be looked into under Section 24 of the Civil Procedure Code.
IMPORTANT PROVISIONS
- Section 24 of the Civil Procedure Code- This Section is regarding the general power of a High Court or District Court to tranfer, withdraw, dispose or retransfer any case, appeal or other proceedings to any other competent Court.
OVERVIEW
- There was a pending civil case between the parties before the Family Court of Bangalore.
- The petitioner sought to transfer the case from this Court to the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Doddaballapura.
ISSUESRAISED
- Whether the civil case ought to be transferred to the competent family court in Doddaballapura according to provisions of Section 24 of the Civil Procedure Code?
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED BY THE PETITIONER
- It was argued by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that it was difficult for the petitioner to attend the proceedings at Doddaballapura regularly as it is almost 70 km away from Bangalore.
- It was prayed that the petition be allowed.
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED BY THE RESPONDENT
- The learned counsel appearing for the respondent contended that the petitioner is working at Chikkaballapura the impugned case is currently at the stage of cross-examination of the petitioner.
- Thus accordingly, he sought for dismissal of the petition.
JUDGEMENT ANALYSIS
- It was also a well settled principle that the convenience of the parties was not grounds on which transfer petition could be sought under Section- 24 of Code of Civil Procedure, but it was the hardship that would cause to the parties thatwas to be looked into.
- The Hon’ble Apex Court judgement in the case of Dr. Subramaniam Swamy vs Ramakrishna Hegde reported in 1990 (1) SCC 4 was referred to, which held that mere convenience of the parties would not be enough criteria but there must be sufficient cause in the transfer petition toshow that the chosen forum for trial, if not changed, will result in a denial of justice to the parties.
- Considering this case law and the fact that the petitioner was working at Chikkaballapura, the Hon'ble Judge was of the view that the distance between Doddaballapura to Bangalore was commutable in nature.
- As the Judge could not find any acceptable ground to transfer the civil petition from the competent court in Bangalore to Doddaballapura, it was dismissed.
CONCLUSION
Since the petitioner was working in Chikkaballapura which was in commutable distance to Bangalore, and because the Court could not find any situation that would cause denial of justice to the parties if the case was not transferred, it was held that the transfer petition ought to be dismissed.
Click here to download the original copy of the judgement
