APHC010312292025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3397] TUESDAY,THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENUTHURUMALLI GOPALA KRISHNA RAO TRANS. CIVIL MISC.PETITION NO: 183/2025 Between: 1. KATHE ESWARAIAH @ KATHE CHINNA ESWARAIAH, S/O LATE GANGANNA, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, BUSINESS, R/O. 4-14-51-5, OPP. VIJAY HOMES, KADAPA ROAD, PULIVENDULA CITY (P AND M), YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. 2. GUDURU GURU PRASAD,, S/O. BHUPATHI, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS. BUSINESS, R/O. 2-8-142, ROTARY PURAM, NEAR SUB- REGISTRAR OFFICE, PULIVENDULA CITY (P AND M), YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. 3. GAJULA BABAIAH,, S/O. FAKRUDDIN, AGED 44 YEARS. BUSINESS, R/O. 2-8-152, ROTARY PURAM, NEAR SUB- REGISTRAR OFFICE, PULIVENDULA CITY (P AND M), YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. MUDDIGARI CHINNA BALI REDDY, S/O. LATE M. CHINNA VENGAL REDDY, AGED 65 YEARS. AGRICULTURE, R/O. 4-8-164-UP, NEAR HP GAS, BY PASS ROAD, PULIVENDULA CITY (PAND M), YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. 2. MUDDIGARI JAYA KISHORE REDDY, S/O. M. CHINNA BALI REDDY, AGED 44 YEARS. BUSINESS, R/O. 4-8-164-UP, NEAR HP GAS, BY PASS ROAD, PULIVENDULA CITY (P AND M), YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition Under Section 24 of the C.P.C. Praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith,the High Court may be pleased topleased to transfer OS No. 52 of 2023 on the file of IV Additional District Judge, Kadapa to VI Additional District and Sessions Judge-cum-Judge, Family Court, Kadapa or any other Additional District Judge or District Judge Court at Kadapa in the interest of justice and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased Pleased to stay all further proceedings in O.S. No. 52 of 2023 on the file of IV Additional District Judge, Kadapa pending the Transfer CMP pending the transfer CMP in this Hon'ble Court in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. DHARANI KUMAR B Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. G RAMESH BABU The Court made the following: ORDER: The petitioners herein filed the present petition under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking for transfer of O.S.No.52 of 2023 on the file of the IV Additional District Judge, Kadapa, to VI Additional District & Sessions Judge-cum-Judge, Family Court at Kadapa, or District Judge Court at Kadapa, for trial. 2. The case of the petitioner in brief is as follows: I. The petitioners herein in order to prove their case have filed certified copies of several documents, which are supposed to mark as exhibits and the trial court is not marking the said documents as exhibits and the trial court is seeking explanation of each document. II. The petitioners further pleaded that the learned trial Judge is not proceeding to mark the documents filed by them and insisting upon detailed explanations pertaining to each document, including aspects such as the consequences of execution, and the date, time, and place of such execution. It is contended that, as a matter of procedure, the Court is ordinarily expected to confine its inquiry to whether a document is admissible and markable. However, in the present case, the learned Judge is reportedly insisting upon the personal presence of the plaintiffs for the purpose of furnishing elaborate explanations for each document. Under the given circumstances, they apprehend that the proceedings before the learned IV Additional District Judge, Kadapa, may not be conducted in a fair and impartial manner. In view of the said apprehension, the petitioners/plaintiffs herein have filed the present Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition, seeking for transfer of the suit i.e., O.S.No.52 of 2023, from the file of the IV Additional District Judge, Kadapa, to the Court of theVI Additional District and Sessions Judge- cum-Judge, Family Court, Kadapa, or to any other competent Additional District Judge or District Judge at Kadapa. 3. Learned counsel for the respondent represented a counter-affidavit was filed on 14.07.2025. Learned counsel for the respondent further contended that the petitioners have made un-substantiated and baseless allegations against the Presiding Officer of the Trial Court, which are detrimental to the integrity of the judicial system. He further submitted that the petition filed by the petitioners lacks merit and, therefore, the present Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is liable to be dismissed. 4. Heard learned counsel appearing on both sides. 5. In the affidavit filed by the petitioners, it is reiterated that the learned Trial Judge is not marking the documents, despite the same having been filed along with the chief affidavit. It is further stated that the learned Trial Judge is insisting upon an explanation regarding the said documents, which has caused a reasonable apprehension in the minds of the petitioners that justice may not be rendered before the Court of the IV Additional District Judge, Kadapa. 6. The law is well settled that necessity for transfer of suits from one Court to another would arise if only there exists any similarity of cause of action or commonality of the parties. When such situation does not exist, the relief claimed for the transfer of suit cannot be granted. Section 24 of CPC confers comprehensive power on the Court to transfer suits, appeals or other proceedings at any stage either on the application by any party or suo motu. Although discretionary power of transfer of cases cannot be imprisoned within a straight jacket of any cast, iron formula unanimously applicable to all situations, it cannot be gain said that the power of transfer of the case must be exercised with due care, caution and circumspection. 7. In matters relating to the transfer of a Civil Suit from one Court to another, discretion is to be exercised only under exceptional circumstances. In the present case, the counter-affidavit filed by the respondents, along with the certified copies of the case proceedings downloaded from the e-Courts website, reveals that the matter was adjourned on multiple occasions, i.e., on 18.03.2025, 15.04.2025, 21.04.2025, and 08.05.2025. It is also evident from the record that the petitioners/plaintiffs failed to appear before the trial Court on the said dates. The learned trial Judge had granted ample opportunities to the plaintiffs for recording their evidence; however, they failed to avail the same and did not attend the proceedings before the trial Court. 8. On a careful perusal of the Court proceedings downloaded from the e- Courts website, as filed by the respondents, clearly indicates that there are no merits in the present Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition filed by the petitioners herein. Further, mere apprehension is not a ground for seeking transfer of O.S.No.52 of 2023, from one Court to another. As seen from the material on record, no prima-face material has been placed by the petitioners stating that the presiding officer of that court is acting unfairly. Furthermore, the allegations made by the petitioners are vague. On the basis of such vague allegations, the petitioners cannot seek transfer of O.S.No.52 of 2023 from the file of the IV Additional District Judge, Kadapa, to either the VI Additional District and Sessions Judge-cum-Judge, Family Court, Kadapa, or the Court of the District Judge, Kadapa. 9. In view of the aforesaid reasons, I am of the considered view that there are no valid grounds to consider the request of petitioners for transfer of O.S.No.52 of 2023 on the file of the IV Additional District Judge, Kadapa, to VI Additional District & Sessions Judge-cum-Judge, Family Court at Kadapa, or District Judge Court at Kadapa. This Court do not find any merits and subsistence in the contentions taken by the petitioners and as such, the present Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is liable to be dismissed as devoid of merits. 10. With the above observations, the Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending and the Interim order granted earlier, if any, shall stand closed. _______________________________ JUSTICE V. GOPALA KRISHNA RAO Date: 15.07.2025 CVD