1 2025:CGHC:4938 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WP227 No. 603 of 2021 1 - Smt. Sunita Dhruw W/o Late Shri Dilharan Prasad Dhruw Aged About 45 Years R/o H. No. 227, Kalchuri, Awas, Behind Teliphone Exchange, Post Office Lane, Rajkishore Nagar, Tahsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Jagdish Prasad Pandey S/o Late Shri Laksham Prasad Pandey Aged About 62 Years R/o Village And Post Kargikala, Tahsil Kota, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner : Dr. Shailesh Ahuja, Advocate For Respondent : Mr. Achyut Tiwari, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 28.01.2025 1. The petitioner has assailed the order dated 17.09.2021 passed by the District Judge, Bilaspur (C.G.) in MJC Civil No. 156/2021 whereby an application moved under Section 24 of CPC for the Digitally signed by REKHA SINGH -2- transfer of the civil suit has been dismissed. 2. The facts of the present case are that the respondent filed a civil suit against the petitioner which was registered as Civil Suit No. 28/2020 in the Court of Civil Judge, Class-II Kota, District Bilaspur. The petitioner was impleaded as the defendant in that pending suit. The petitioner moved an application under Section 24 of the CPC for the transfer of the civil suit from Kota to Bilaspur on the ground that she is a widow as her husband died on 04.04.2020; she is a member of the scheduled tribe; she is a teacher posted at Bijour, District Bilaspur and it would be very difficult for her to attend the hearing of the civil suit at Kota. The respondent/plaintiff raised an oral objection and stated that the cause of action arose within the territorial jurisdiction of the Civil Court Kota. The learned District Judge vide order dated 17.09.2021 rejected the application on the ground that on account of personal difficulties, the case cannot be transferred particularly, when the territorial jurisdiction is lying with the Civil Court, Kota. 3. Dr. Ahuja, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is a widow lady having two children and it would be very difficult for her to attend the proceedings of the pending civil suit on each date of the hearing. He would refer to Section 24 of the CPC and submit that on the application of any of the parties, the High Court or the District Court may at any stage 3 transfer any suit for trial or disposal to any Court subordinate to it and competent to try or dispose of the same. He would pray to set aside the order dated 17.09.2021 passed by the District Judge and to allow the instant petition. 4. On the other hand, Mr. Tiwari, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent would oppose the submissions made by Dr. Ahuja. He would submit that the transfer of the case from one court to another indirectly casts doubt on the competence and integrity of the judge from whom the case is sought to be transferred. Only on the good and sufficient grounds clearly set out in the application, the order of transfer may be passed. He would lastly submit that the present petition deserves to be dismissed. 5. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the documents placed on the record. 6. Section 24 of the CPC reads as under:- S.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- (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 -4- (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)re-transfer 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.] A bare reading of this Section would make it clear that the High Court and the District Court may at any stage of proceeding, transfer any suit, appeal or other proceeding for trial or disposal to any Court subordinate to it and competent to try or dispose of the same. 7. In the present case, Civil Suit No.28/2020 has been pending consideration before the Civil Judge, Class-II Kota. 5 8. According to the provisions of Section 16 of the CPC, the suits are to be instituted where the subject matter is situated. 9. The petitioner in the present petition has not annexed a copy of the plaint and the copy of application moved under Section 24 of the CPC in the present petition. But from the pleadings, it can be inferred that the cause of action arose within the territorial jurisdiction of the Civil Court, Kota, therefore, the civil suit was instituted before it. 10.The order of transfer of the civil suit can be passed when the party has a reasonable apprehension that justice will be denied to him/her. 11.The petitioner has not made allegations against the impartiality or fairness of the judge nor with respect to the correctness or otherwise of the orders passed by the said Court. The petitioner has assigned personal reasons for the transfer of the case. 12.The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Pushpa Devi Saraf and another Vs. Jai Narain Parasrampuria and others, 1992 (2) SCC 676 held as under:- "6. When a transfer petition is filed making such or similar allegations, the report if an when called for, should normally be confined to the allegations made against the impartiality or fairness of the Judge and not with respect to the correctness or other-wise of the orders passed by him. We are saying this because it appears that on the transfer petition being filed, the -6- learned District Judge appears to have called for a report from the Presiding Officer. In his report, the Presiding Officer not only denies the imputations made against him but also explains and justifies the orders passed by him. This he did evidently because in the transfer petition, the correctness of some of his orders was questioned. In our opinion, a Presiding Officer of a court should not be put to such an explanation, barring exceptional circumstances. 7. Having heard the counsel for both the parties, we are of the opinion that the allegations in the transfer petition are not sufficient and do not warrant an order of transfer. We are satisfied that the learned Presiding Officer was only trying to hear the case expeditiously in pursuance of the order of this Court dated 14.8.1991." 13.In the matter of Kulwinder Kaur alias Kulwinder Gurcharan Singh Vs. Kandi Friends Education Trust and others, 2008 (3) SCC 659, their Lordships of the Supreme Court while dealing with the proceedings under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure have held as under:- "23. Reading Sections 24 and 25 of the Code together and keeping in view various judicial pronouncements, certain broad propositions as to what may constitute a ground for transfer have been laid down by courts. They are balance of convenience or inconvenience to the plaintiff or the defendant or witnesses; convenience or in convenience of a particular place of trial having regard to the nature of evidence on the points involved in the suit; issues raised by the parties; reasonable apprehension in the mind of the litigant that he might not get justice in the court in which the suit is pending; important questions of law involved or a consideration section of public interested in the litigation "interest of justice" demanding demanding to transfer of suit or appeal or other proceedings etc. Above are some of the instances which are germane in considering the question of transfer of a suit, appeal or other proceedings. They are, however, 7 illustrative in nature and by no means be treated as exhaustive. If on the above or other relevant considerations, the court feels that the plaintiff or the defendant is not likely to have a "fair trial" in the court from which he seeks to transfer a case, it is not only the power, but the duty of the court to make such order." 14.Taking into consideration the facts of the present case and the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the above-referred matters, I do not find any good ground to interfere with the order passed by the learned District Judge, Bilaspur. Consequently, the present petition fails and is hereby dismissed. No cost(s). Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Rekha