- 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA CIVIL PETITION No.202/2025 BETWEEN: 1. SMT. CHANDANA M.N. W/O LATE SRI N. MAHESH, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, NO.54, 12TH MAIN ROAD, OPPOSITE TO INDIAN NATIONAL SCHOOL, 4TH BLOCK, NANDINI LAYOUT, BENGALURU-560096. 2. MASTER GAGAN S/O LATE SRI N. MAHESH, AGED ABOUT 9 YEARS, NO.54, 12TH MAIN ROAD, OPPOSITE TO INDIAN NATIONAL SCHOOL, 4TH BLOCK, NANDINI LAYOUT, BENGALURU-560096. REPRESENTED BY HIS GUARDIAN: SMT. CHANDANA. 3. MASTER RACHAN S/O LATE SRI N. MAHESH AGED ABOUT 6 YEARS, NO.54, 12TH MAIN ROAD, OPPOSITE TO INDIAN NATIONAL SCHOOL, 4TH BLOCK, NANDINI LAYOUT, BENGALURU-560096. REPRESENTED BY HIS GUARDIAN: SMT. CHANDANA. ...PETITIONERS (BY SRI BHAGAVAN S.G., ADVOCATE) - 2 - AND: 1. PUTTALINGAMMA W/O LATE SRI M. NANJAPPA, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, NO.54, 12TH MAIN ROAD, NANDINI LAYOUT, BENGALURU-560096. 2. VIJAYA .N W/O SRI SHIVANNA, D/O LATE SRI M. NANJAPPA, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, NO.351/2, 3RD CROSS, LAGGERE, PARVATHINAGARA, BENGALURU–560058. 3. SMT. LAKSHMI W/O SRI SHANKAR, D/O LATE SRI M. NANJAPPA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, NO.89, 1ST MAIN, FRIENDS CIRCLE, RAJESHWARINAGARA, LAGGERE, BENGALURU–560058. 4. SRI MANJUNATH .N S/O LATE SRI M. NANJAPPA, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, NO.54, 4TH BLOCK, 12TH MAIN ROAD, NANDINI LAYOUT, BENGALURU–560096. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI N. SRIDHAR, ADVOCATE FOR R-1 TO R-3; SRI SHRIKANTH B., ADVOCATE FOR R-4) THIS CIVIL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 24 OF CPC, PRAYING TO TRANSFER O.S.NO.997/2024 PENDING IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC NELAMANALA, BENGALURU RURAL TO THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL CITY CIVIL JUDGE, BENGALURU CITY, FOR DISPOSAL IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW TO MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE. THIS CIVIL PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR ORDERS ON 23/08/2025, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: - 3 - CORAM: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA CAV ORDER The present petition is filed by defendant Nos.2 to 4 under Section 24 of CPC seeking transfer of O.S. No.997/2024 pending on the file of the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Nelamangala, Bengaluru Rural to the Principal City Civil Judge, Bengaluru City. 2. Suit O.S. No.997/2024 has been instituted by respondent Nos.1 to 3 for partition and separate possession claiming 1/5th share in respect of immovable properties situated within the limits of Bengaluru, Nelamangala and Mandya. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the respondents. 4. Contentions of the petitioners: i. Petitioner No.1 is a widow with two minor children aged about 9 and 6 years, and she is residing with them at Bengaluru. - 4 - ii. The respondents are also residing at Bengaluru, and hence, conducting proceedings at Bengaluru would cause no prejudice to them. iii. The suit schedule properties are situated partly within the jurisdiction of Nelamangala Court and partly within the jurisdiction of the Bengaluru Court, therefore, the Bengaluru Court also has jurisdiction under Section 17 CPC. iv. Petitioners find it extremely difficult to commute 35 kms to Nelamangala, due to the lack of convenient accessibility and safety of herself and her minor children. v. Petitioners seek for transfer on the ground of balance of convenience and interest of justice. 5. Contentions of the respondents: i. Respondents object for the transfer and submit that the petitioners-defendants Nos.2 to 4 are seeking for - 5 - transfer only after rejection of the earlier application filed by defendant No.2 under Order VII Rule 11 (d) CPC. ii. It is submitted that under Section 17 CPC, since most of the suit schedule properties are situated within the jurisdiction of Nelamangala Court, the institution of the suit at Nelamangala is proper and valid. iii. Respondents contend that the petitioners having already derived income from some of the suit schedule properties, are financially capable of defending the suit at Nelamangala. iv. Respondents further contend that there are several litigations and petitions filed between the parties regarding the suit properties and hence, the transfer plea is only a tactic to delay the proceedings. Therefore, pray for dismissal of the transfer petition, - 6 - stating that no extraordinary grounds have been made out for invoking Section 24 CPC. 6. The High Court or the District Court has power under Section 24 CPC to transfer any suit, appeal or proceedings pending before a subordinate Court to another subordinate Court competent to try it. The primary consideration in deciding transfer is the convenience of the parties and ends of justice. The Court is not bound by mere technicalities but must ensure that proceedings are conducted in a forum where justice is accessible to all concerned. Section 17 CPC envisages that when immovable properties are situated within the jurisdiction of different Courts, the suit may be instituted in any Court within whose local jurisdiction any portion of the property is situated. Thus, the institution of the suit in Nelamangala Court is also legally maintainable. However, jurisdiction is one thing and convenience of trial is another and transfer under Section 24 CPC is decided on equitable consideration. Where a party seeking transfer is a widow with minor children, Courts - 7 - ordinarily lean towards her convenience and safety in the interest of justice. Petitioner No.1 is a widow with two minor children aged about 9 and 6 years, residing at Bengaluru. The respondents are also residing at Bengaluru. The suit schedule properties are partly situated at Nelamangala and partly within Bengaluru jurisdiction and hence, both Courts are competent under Section 17 CPC. Considering all the aspects, and since all the parties are residents of Bengaluru, transferring the matter to the Principal City Civil Court, Bengaluru City, would serve the ends of justice, reduce inconvenience and ensure fair participation. In view of the settled law, while the institution at Nelamangala Court is with jurisdiction, the power of transfer under Section 24 CPC is to be exercised to advance justice and avoid hardship. Given that all parties reside at Bengaluru and petitioner No.1 is a widow with two minor children facing difficulty and safety issues in commuting, the balance of convenience is wholly in favour of transfer. Accordingly, the transfer of O.S. No.997/2024 is warranted and this Court pass the following: - 8 - ORDER i. Civil petition is allowed. ii. O.S. No.997/2024 is withdrawn from the Court of Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Nelamangala and transferred to Principal District and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural. iii. Parties to appear before the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural on 24.09.2025 without waiting for further notice. iv. Principal District and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural to assign to the appropriate Court. Sd/- ________________________ JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA MBM