ORDER :
The petitioner has filed this Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition under Section 24 of Civil Procedure Code (for short 'CPC') with a prayer for withdrawal of Commercial Original Suit (for short 'COS') No.60 of 2021, pending on the file of the Special Court for Trial and Disposal of Commercial Disputes, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar and to transfer to any other Court of equivalent and competent jurisdiction either in City Civil Courts, Hyderabad or Secunderabad or in Ranga Reddy District.
2. Notice is served on the respondents. Sri Syed Razzaq Ali Ahmed, Advocate has filed Vakalat for 1strespondent. Respondent No.2 is not necessary party. The 1strespondent has not filed any counter and there was no representation on behalf of 1strespondent subsequent to filing of Vakalat by Sri Syed Razzaq Ali Ahmed, Advocate. Accordingly, heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the submissions made by him have received due consideration of this Court.
1
: 2:
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that there were some corrections in the docket proceedings of the trial Court. Certain orders were passed, written statement was accepted contrary to Order 37, Rule 3 (5) of CPC the petitioner was constrained to file Civil Revision Petition Nos.189 and 191 of 2022. There were corrections in the docket proceedings of I.A.No.16 of 2022. He relied on the principles laid in the following decisions seeking for transfer of COS No.60 of 2021 to any other competent Court, having jurisdiction:
(1) Subba Naika Vs.State of Karnataka and others1.
(2) Ranjit Thakur Vs.Union of India and others2.
(3) Gurucharan Dass Chadha Vs.State of Rajasthan3.
(4) Lalita Rajyalakshmi and another Vs. State of Bihar and another4.
(5) State of West Bengal and others Vs. Shivananda Pathak and others5
(6) P.K.Ghosh, I.A.S. and another Vs.J.G.Rajput6.
(7) R.C.Sharma Vs.Union of India and others7
(8) Sudha Sharma Vs. Ram Naresh Jaiswal and another8.
4. This Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed by the petitioner / plaintiff in COS No.60 of 2021 for withdrawal of
: 3:
the said Commercial Original Suit, pending on the file of the Special Court for Trial and Disposal of Commercial Disputes, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar and to transfer the same to any other competent Court having jurisdiction either at Hyderabad or at Ranga Reddy District. The petitioner has filed supporting affidavit alleging certain procedural irregularities stating that the petitioner has lost faith in that particular Court, permission was accorded for filing written statement without adhering to the mandatory procedure prescribed under Order 37, Rule 3 (6)(a) of CPC. Aggrieved by the same, the party has filed CRP No.797 of 2022. There were certain corrections in the docket proceedings of I.A.No.16 of 2022 by striking out the orders dated 11.03.2022, it is mentioned in handwriting. There were certain corrections in the A-Diary dated 10.12.2021,
22.12.2021, 27.12.2021, 31.12.2021, 03.01.2022, 18.01.2022
and 21.01.2022 in respect of suit. All these events and the manner in which the procedure has been violated and the orders were passed in I.A.No.16 of 2021 in COS, it has given any amount of suspicion and thereby the petitioner has lost confidence on the Court and there is a reasonable and bonafide apprehension in the mind of the petitioner that they may not get
: 4:
fair consideration of their claim in the suit and accordingly, filed this transfer civil miscellaneous petition.
5. Be it stated that though 1strespondent is represented by their learned counsel, who has filed Vakalat, they did not chose to file counter. After filing of Vakalat, learned counsel for the respondent No.1 even did not chose to appear in this transfer civil miscellaneous petition and accordingly, on hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, it was treated as heard on behalf of respondent No.1. Whereas, respondent No.2 is not necessary party to the proceedings.
6. In Subba Naika Vs.State of Karnataka and others
case (1stsupra) it was held that passing of the orders in the chamber and not in the open Court with back date that itself is a fraud on the system and based on deep seated proprieties which the judiciary has carved for itself and which are well settled principles and breach of those principles is not permissible.
7. In Ranjit Thakur Vs.Union of India and others case (2ndsupra) the principle laid is that apprehension in the mind of
: 5:
the litigant with regard to likelihood of bias is sufficient for seeking transfer of the matter pending before concerned Judge. Similar principle is laid in Gurucharan Dass Chadha Vs.State of Rajasthan (3rdsupra) and Lalita Rajyalakshmi and another Vs. State of Bihar and another (4thsupra) relied on by the petitioner. Whereas in State of West Bengal and others Vs. Shivananda Pathak and others (5thsupra) and P.K.Ghosh, I.A.S. and another Vs.J.G.Rajput (6thsupra) it was held that justice should not only be done but it also seems to be done. In
R.C.Sharma Vs.Union of India and others (7thsupra) and
Sudha Sharma Vs. Ram Naresh Jaiswal and another (8th supra) it was held that the confidence of the litigant should not be shaken and the litigant should come to the Court with confidence.
8. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that as per the sitting arrangement dated 17.08.2022 this Court has to deal with all the transfer civil miscellaneous applications including the transfer civil miscellaneous petitions, filed for transfer of commercial original suits and the petitioner need not to file such an application before the Commercial Appellate
: 6:
Division and that this Court is competent to entertain the transfer applications even for transfer of commercial original suits from one Court to another competent Court.
9. Here in the instant case, COS No.60 of 2021 is pending on the file of the Special Court for Trial and Disposal of Commercial Disputes, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar under Commercial Courts Act, 2015 and that Court is having jurisdiction over the Revenue Districts of Ranga Reddy and the entire Telangana area except Hyderabad Revenue District. There is a Principal Special Court and additional special Court in the cadre of District Judge for trial and disposal of commercial disputes at Hyderabad having territorial jurisdiction over Hyderabad Revenue District. The Commercial Courts Act 2015 deals with jurisdiction of the Special Judge in respect of commercial disputes and that Court is not sub-ordinate to the Chief Judge, City Civil Court or Principal District Judge concerned. It is not a regular Civil Court where under the learned Principal District Judge or Chief Judge, City Civil Court is competent to withdraw and transfer certain matters either to or from the special Court under Commercial Courts Act, 2015.
: 7:
10. Section 15 of Commercial Courts Act, 2015 deals with transfer of pending cases and Section 16 deals with amendments to CPC in its application to commercial disputes, wherein, Section 24 of CPC is not mentioned. Thus, considering the sitting arrangement dated 17.08.2022 a conjoint reading of Sections 15 and 16 of Commercial Courts Act, together with Section 24 of CPC, I am convinced with the submissions made by learned counsel for the transfer petitioner that this Court has jurisdiction to transfer the pending commercial disputes from one competent Court to another competent Court under Section 24 of CPC.
11. The cardinal principle for exercise of Section 24 of CPC is that the ends of justice should demand the transfer of suit, appeal or other proceedings and there is no strait-jacket formula or the principle laid either for considering the request or for rejecting the request for transfer. In the present case the petitioner / plaintiff has cited several instances stating that the confidence of the party is shaken. Therefore, considering the principle that justice is not only be done but it also seen to be done and that the confidence of the litigant should not be
: 8:
shaken in the institution, I am inclined to accept the request of the petitioner.
12. In the result, this transfer civil miscellaneous petition is allowed, COS No.60 of 2021, pending on the file of the Special Court for Trial and Disposal of Commercial Disputes, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar is ordered to be withdrawn and transferred to the Principal Special Court in the cadre of District Judge for trial of Commercial Disputes at City Civil Courts, Hyderabad for disposal in accordance with law. The Special Court for Trial and Disposal of Commercial Disputes, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar shall transmit the entire case records in COS No60 of 2021, duly indexed, within one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order. In the circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to the costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications if any pending, shall stands closed.
________________________________
A.VENKATESWHARA REDDY, J
Dated : 19-10-2022 abb