APHC010490572025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3397] FRIDAY,THE TENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENUTHURUMALLI GOPALA KRISHNA RAO TRANS. CIVIL MISC.PETITION NO: 302/2025 Between: Betanabhotla Ramanand and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND Vishnubhotla Sakunthala ...RESPONDENT Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. P N MURTHY Counsel for the Respondent: 1. K NAVEEN KUMAR The Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.GOPALA KRISHNA RAO TRANSFER CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.302 of 2025 ORDER: The petitioners have filed the present petition under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking to withdraw O.S.No.23 of 2024, on the file of the XI Additional District Judge, Tenali and transfer the same to the Principal District Judge, Guntur or any other Additional District Judge, Guntur District. 2. The case of the petitioners in brief is as follows: I. The petitioners have filed O.S.No.23 of 2024, on the file of the file of XI Additional District Judge, Tenali seeking for specific performance of oral agreement of sale dated 29.04.2022, by directing the defendant to execute and register a regular sale deed in favour of the plaintiffs or their nominee in respect of the plaint schedule property on receiving the balance sale consideration of Rs.7,00,000/- subject to their living in the plaint schedule property by the defendant and her daughter during their lifetime and in the case of defendant’s failure to do so, the petitioners/plaintiffs requested the Court below to execute and register a regular sale deed in favour of the plaintiffs on behalf of the defendant and also for grant of permanent injunction restraining the defendant and her daughter from executing any sort of document or creating interest in favour of the third parties over the plaint schedule property. II. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that at present 2018 matters are coming up for trail, before the Court below, but, in the present suit the trial Court is adjourning the matter with short dates and the same is creating a doubt in the petitioners that the Court below is prejudiced against the petitioners. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners are constrained to file the present transfer petition seeking to withdraw O.S.No.23 of 2024, on the file of the XI Additional District Judge, Tenali and transfer the same to the Principal District Judge Court, Guntur. 3. Learned counsel for the respondent would contend that there are no grounds to allow the present transfer civil miscellaneous petition and to drag on the proceedings in a civil suit vide O.S.No.23 of 2024, on the file of the XI Additional District Judge, Tenali, the petitioners herein, who are the plaintiffs in O.S.No.23 of 2024, have filed the present transfer petition and requested to dismiss the transfer civil miscellaneous petition. 4. Heard Sri P.N.Murthy, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sir K.Naveen Kumar, learned counsel respondent. Perused the material available on record. 5. The material on record prima facie goes to show that the petitionr herein are the plaintiffs and the respondent herein is the defendant in O.S.No.23 of 2024, on the file of the XI Additional District Judge, Tenali. As per the plaint averments, the petitioners have filed the aforesaid suit seeking for specific performance of oral agreement of sale dated 29.04.2022. The copy of plaint in O.S.No.23 of 2024 goes to show that both the plaintiffs are brothers and the defendant is the eldest sister of the plaintiffs’ father and she is living in the suit schedule property along with her unmarried daughter by name Durga Prabha and they are not having any male other help. Even as per the plaint averments, by the year 2024 i.e., by the date of institution of the suit in O.S.No.23 of 2024, the defendant is aged about 85 years and she is a super senior citizen. As per the case status filed by the petitioners, the said suit is posted to 30.07.2025, for trial. Though the learned trial Judge has granted eight (08) adjournments for commencement of trial, the trial has not yet been commenced and from time to time, it is being adjourned at the request of the petitioners herein, who are the plaintiffs in O.S.No.23 of 2024, on the file of the XI Additional District Judge, Tenali. The primary objection taken by the petitioners herein is that the trial Court is adjourning the matter with short dates and the same is creating a doubt on them that the Court below is prejudiced against the petitioners. Even as per the plaint avernments, the defendant is the eldest sister of the plaintiffs’ father and the defendant is aged about 85 years and she is staying in the suit schedule property along with her unmarried daughter and the defendant is having no male help. The averments in the plaint itself goes to show that since the defendant is the super senior citizen, aged about 85 years, the trial Court has adjourned the matter by giving short dates, it does not mean that the trial Court has prejudiced against the petitioners/plaintiffs. 6. 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. As seen from the material on record, no prima facie material has been placed by the petitioners to show that the presiding officer of the XI Additional District Court, Tenali, is acting unfairly or influenced by some extortions and considerations. The law is well settled that “mere apprehension is not a ground for seeking transfer of a civil suit from one Court to another Court.” For the aforesaid reasons, I do not find any merit and subsistence in the contentions taken by the petitioners and as such the present Transfer Civil Petition is liable to be dismissed as devoid of merit 8. Resultantly, 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: 10.10.2025 SRT 01 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.GOPALA KRISHNA RAO TRANSFER CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.302 of 2025 Dt. 10.10.2025 SRT