APHC010440202024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3397] WEDNESDAY ,THE FIFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENUTHURUMALLI GOPALA KRISHNA RAO TRANS. CIVIL MISC.PETITION NO: 424/2024 Between: Indukuri Dilip Kumar Raju and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND Indukuri Kanya Kumari and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. . 2. G R SUDHAKAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. N SIVA REDDY 2. MEDAPATI SANTOSH REDDY The Court made the following: ORDER: The petitioners filed the present petition under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking to transfer O.S.No.183 of 2022, on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, at Palakol and O.S.No.147 of 2023, on the file of the I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Kakinada to be transferred and tried along with O.S.No.51 of 2023, on the file of the Senior Civil Judge Court, at Narasapuram. 2. The case of the petitioners in brief is as follows: I. The petitioners filed a Suit vide O.S.No.183 of 2022, on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge at Palakol against the respondent Nos.1 to 3 seeking declaration of title of the plaint schedule property and for recovery of possession of the same. Thereafter, the respondent Nos.1 to 3 filed Suit vide O.S.No.51 of 2023, on the file of the Senior Civil Judge Court at Narasapuram, against the petitioners herein seeking for a direction to declare the Registered Settlement Deed dated 28.05.2019 vide document Nos.3094 of 2019 relating to the land admeasuring Ac.1.03 cents in RS.No.369/2A, Ac.0.12 cents in Rs.No.369/2B of Kapavaram Village, which is shown in Plaint-B Schedule, Registered Settlement Deed dated 18.10.2019 vide Doc.No.6385 of 2019 relating to the land admeasuring Ac.0.55 cents in Rs.369/2A of Kapavaram Village, which is shown as Plaint-A Schedule property and the Registered Settlement Deed dated 23.12.2019 vide Doc.No.7895 of 2019 relating to the land in Ac.0.48 cents inRs.No.369/2A of Kapavaram Village, which is shown as Plaint-A Schedule as collusive, arbitrary, sham, illegal and void as brought into the existence by the defendant No.1 therein committing forgery and cancellation of the same and also for mandatory injunction directing the defendants therein to obtain the settlement deed dated 05.01.2019 executed by one Smt. Indukuri Swarajya Lakshmi Kantham for the Plaint-A schedule land in favour of the plaintiffs in terms of the said settlement deed registered with SRO, Palakol at the expenses of the plaintiffs within the time fixed by the jurisdictional Court and further for grant of a consequential direction of permanent injunction against the defendants. II. Learned counsel for the petitioner further contended that the respondent No.4 filed a Suit vide O.S.No.147 of 2023, on the file of the I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Kakinada against the petitioner No.1 and the respondent No.1 herein seeking the attachment of the plaint schedule property admeasuring Ac.2.06cents in Sy.No.369/2A, alleging that the deceased Smt. Swarajya Lakshmi Kantham has executed a promissory note in favour of the respondent No.4 and borrowed an amount of Rs.12,00,000/- pm 21.10.200 and further an amount of Rs.12,00,000/- on 04.06.2021 and at present the borrowed amount with an interest of Rs.2/- month equals to Rs.38,08,800/- and as such the respondent No.4 sought to decree the said property in his favour. The petitioners further pleaded that as the subject matter of the property involved in the three suits is one and the same and that the suit proceedings in O.S.No.183 of 2022, on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, at Palakol and O.S.No.147 of 2023, on the file of the I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Kakinada, have to be transferred and tried along with O.S.No.51 of 2023, on the file of the Senior Civil Judge Court, at Narasapuram. 3. The respondent Nos.1 to 4 had filed counter affidavits by denying the reliefs sought by the petitioners and requested to dismiss the present Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition. 4. Heard Sri G.R.Sudhakar, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Medapati Santhosh Reddy and Sri N.Siva Reddy, learned counsels appearing for the respondents. Perused the material available on record. 5. Now the points for determination are: Point No.1: Whether the Suit in O.S.No.183 of 2022, on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, at Palakol, which was filed by the petitioners herein, can be transferred to the Senior Civil Judge Court, Narsapuram? Point No.2: Whether the Suit in O.S.No.147 of 2023, on the file of the I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Kakinada which was filed by the respondent No.4 can be transferred to the Senior Civil Judge Court, Narsapuram? POINT No.1: I. The Suit in O.S.No.183 of 2022 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge Court, at Palakol, is filed by the petitioners herein seeking relief for declaration of title and also recovery of possession against the respondent Nos.1 to 3. It is an admitted fact that the respondent Nos.1 to 3 herein had filed a Suit in O.S.No.51 of 2023, on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Narsapuram seeking relief of declaration of the Registered Settlement Deeds dated 28.05.2019, 18.10.2019 and 23.12.2019 bearing Doc.Nos.3094 of 2019, 6385 of 2019 and 7895 of 2019, registered under SRO, Palakol, as collusive, arbitrary, sham, illegal and void and are brought into existence by the defendant No.1 therein. Further, the respondent Nos.1 to 3 have also sought a relief of Mandatory Injunction and Permanent Injunction as prayed in the plaint. II. The trial in both the suits had not yet been commenced before the respective Courts, further the subject matter of the property and as well as the parites involved in both the suits are one and the same. Therefore, if the Suit in O.S.No.183 of 2022, on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Palakol has been transferred to the Senior Civil Judge, Narasapuram, no prejudice would be caused to the respondents herein. Therefore, the Suit in O.S.No.183 of 2022, on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Palakol has to be transferred to the Senior Civil Judge, Narasapuram. Accordingly, the point is answered. POINT NO.2: I. The Suit in O.S.No.147 of 2023, on the file of the I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Kakinada is filed by the respondent No.4/the third party seeking for recovery of the amount, based on the two promissory notes said to have been executed by one Smt. Indukuri Swarajya Lakshmi Kantham against the petitioner No.1 and the respondent No.1 herein and the remaining parties in the present Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition are not the parties in O.S.No.147 of 2023, on the file of the I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Kakinada. In fact, the plaintiff in O.S.No.147 of 2023, on the file of the I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Kakinada, is no way connected with either O.S.No.183 of 2022 (or) O.S.No.147 of 2023 and the cause of action mentioned in O.S.No.147 of 2023, on the file of the I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Kakinada and the remaining two suits are different with each other. II. Learned counsel for the petitioners has draw the attention of this Court that the subject matter of the property involved in both the suits is one and the same. As stated supra, the plaintiff in O.S.No.147 of 2023 is a third party and is no way connected with the either of the suits i.e., O.S.No.183 of 2022 (or) O.S.No.147 of 2023. Further, the petitioner No.1 and the respondent No.1 herein are the only parties and the remaining petitioners and the respondents herein are not the parties to the Suit in O.S.No.147 of 2023. 6. Learned counsel for the respondents has place his reliance on a Judgment passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in Shashank M Shaha Vs Prabha B Shah, wherein W.P.No.1632 of 2020 has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India and the facts relating to the aforesaid case law are different to that of the instant case. 7. The Law is well settled that “The Necessity or occasion to transfer one Suit from one Court to another would arise, if only, there exists any similarity of cause of action or commonality of the parties”, such a situation does not exist in the present case on hand. However, as long as the relief claimed in O.S.No.183 of 2022 & O.S.No.147 of 2023 are different in nature, as such, it is not at all permissible for transferring suit. Therefore, I do not find any grounds to transfer the Suit in O.S.No.147 of 2023, on the file of the I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Kakinada to the Senior Civil Judge Court, at Narasapuram. Accordingly, the Point No.2 is answered against the petitioner. 8. In the result, the Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is partly allowed and the Suit in O.S.No.183 of 2022, on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge Court at Palakol is hereby withdrawn and transferred to the Senior Civil Judge Court, Narsapuram. The relief of transfer sought in O.S.No.147 of 2023, on the file of the I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Kakinada is dismissed. Both the parties do bear their own costs. 9. With these observations, the Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is partly allowed. 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: 05.02.2025 SRT