APHC010466712024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3397] THURSDAY ,THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENUTHURUMALLI GOPALA KRISHNA RAO TRANS. CIVIL MISC.PETITION NO: 347/2024 Between: Ramineni Lakshmi Tulasamma, and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND Smt Metia Siva Nageswaramma and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. RAMINENI SUDHEER Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. NIMMAGADDA REVATHI 2. K.KRISHNA RAO The Court made the following: ORDER: The petitioners filed the present petition under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking to withdraw the O.S.No.32 of 2018 on the file of the Principal District Judge, Ongole, Prakasam District, and transfer the same to the Additional District Court at Bapatla, for trial. 2. The petitioners are the defendant Nos.3 to 5 in O.S.No.32 of 2018 on the file of the III Additional District Judge, Ongole, Prakasam District. The respondent Nos.1 & 2 herein are the plaintiffs and the other respondents herein are the defendants in the aforesaid suit. 3. The case of the petitioners in brief is as follows:- I. The petitioner No.1 submitted that the Respondents Nos.1, 2 & 5 are daughters of respondent Nos.3 & 4. The petitioner Nos.2 & 3 are the sons of petitioner No.1. The petitioner No.1 pleaded that the grandfather of the petitioner No.1 Sri Adinarayana @ Nallayya has 2 sons i.e., Kurra Subba Rao/Respondent No.3 herein and Kurra Venkateswarlu. Sri Adinarayana acquired properties on 12-04-1968, the properties of Sri Adinarayana was portioned into 3 shares through a Registered Partition Deed vide Partition Deed No.379/1968, dated 12-04-1968, out of 3 shares one share allotted to Sri Kurra Subba Rao (R-1) herein, i.e., husband of the 4th respondent, one share given to Sri Kurra Venkateswarlu and one share kept with them for life estate later developed to the other two shares. The petitioner No.1 that after partition of the property through a registered Partition deed, the 3rd respondent is absolute owner of the properties allotted to his share mentioned separately in Annexure-l. The father of petitioner No.1 i.e., Respondent No.3 executed a Registered Will in favor of the Respondent No.4 and petitioner No.1 herein got the property through a Registered Will bearing Document No.43K3 44/2018, dated 01-04-2018. II. The petitioners further pleaded that after exchange of legal notices, between the respondent No. 3 and respondents Nos.1 & 2, the Respondent Nos.1 & 2 filed a Civil Suit vide O.S.No.32 of 2018 on the file of III Additional District Judge, Ongole, Prakasam District, seeking partition of the properties fallen within the share of 3rd respondent and also the properties purchased by the respondent Nos.4, 5 & 6, claiming that the 3rd respondent purchased the said properties in the name of petitioners with the joint family funds contending that they are claiming to be co-partners of the Joint Family. In the said suit the respondent Nos.2 & 3 are intentionally not included into the scheduled properties in O.S.Nos.196 of 2019 and O.S No.200 of 2019 on the file of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Bapatla, which were acquired by the 3rd respondent under Registered gift deed vide Doc.No.1669 of 1980, dated 27- 11-1980 and sale deed vide Doc.No.860 of 1979, dated 04-06-1979 respectively. 4. Hence, the petitioners are constrained to file the present Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition, seeking to withdraw the O.S.No.32 of 2018 on the file of the III Additional District Judge, Ongole, Prakasam District and transfer the same to the Additional District Judge, Bapatla, Guntur Judicial District. 5. The respondents have filed their counter-affidavits. 6. Heard Sri Ghanta Rama Rao, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri Ramineni Sudheer, learned counsel for the petitioners, Smt. Nimmagadda Revathi, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1 & 2 and Sri Nanda Kishore, learned counsel for the respondent No.7. 7. The petitioners herein filed this petition seeking to withdraw the O.S.No.32 of 2018 on the file of the III Additional District Judge, Ongole, Prakasam District, which is filed by the respondent Nos.1 & 2 herein seeking for relief of partition of the plaint schedule property, which suit is pending before the III Additional District Judge, Ongole, Prakasam District. 8. Learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1 and 2 would contends that chief affidavit of the plaintiff has been filed before the trial Court and the suit i.e., O.S.No.32 of 2018, is posted for cross-examination of PW.1. 9. The case of the petitioners is that, the other two (2) suits i.e., O.S.No.196 of 2019 and O.S.No.200 of 2019, which were filed by the petitioner No.1, are pending before the Court at Principal Junior Civil Judge, Bapatla, seeking for relief of declaration of the title. 10. As seen from the material on record, the petitioner Nos.1 & 2 herein are the alone parties to the O.S.No.32 of 2018, the petitioner No.1 and the respondent No.2 herein are the only parties in another suit i.e., O.S.No.200 of 2019, whereas the suit for partition is filed by the respondent Nos.1 & 2, against the nine (9) defendants. Moreover, the appearance of the parties in a civil suit before the Civil Court is not at all required and their appearance is only required at the time of giving evidence and the subject matter in all the three (3) suits are different. 11. Learned counsel for the respondents would contend that, there is no Presiding Officer to the VI Additional District Court at Bapatla and the said post was kept vacant since a long time and the XII Additional District Judge, at Tenali, is holding full additional charge of the VI Additional District Judge, at Bapatla. 12. As stated supra, the subject matter in O.S.No.32 of 2018 and the subject matter in other suits i.e., O.S.No.196 of 2019 and O.S.No.200 of 2019 which are pending before the Principal Junior Civil Judge Court at Bapatla, are different. It is well settled that, parties’ convenience alone cannot be looked into in transferring a civil suit from one Court to another Court. The necessity or occasion to transfer the Civil suit from one Court to another would arise, if only, there exists any similarity of cause of action or commonality of parties. Such a situation does not exist in the present suit. 13. For the aforesaid reasons, I am of the considered view that, it is not a fit case to withdraw the O.S.No.32 of 2018 on the file of the III Additional District Judge, Ongole, Prakasam District and transfer the same to the Additional District Court at Bapatla. 14. Therefore, 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: 30.01.2025 CVD