JMC vs Ashok Aggarwal

Muzaffar Hussain Attar, J.—This application u/s 24 of CPC is filed, with the prayer that Civil Original Suit titled Ashok Aggarwal v. Jammu

Municipal Corporation, pending on the files of Learned Principal District Judge, Jammu be ordered to be transferred to some other court of

competent jurisdiction inter alia on the grounds which are summarized in paragraphs 3 to 6 of the application, the same are noticed as under:-

That respondent-plaintiff is declaring that he knows the presiding officer and will get the suit decided in his favour.

That when one of the witness of the defendant, who is retired officer of the Municipality and who now is a practicing advocate appeared to

depose the presiding officer observed that he should not appear as a witness as he is a practicing lawyer. During the recording of the statement the

presiding officer observed that he was a interested witness and he (Presiding Officer) will have to make observation in this respect in his order.

Later on the presiding officer started cross examining the witness himself.

That the Bail-able warrants of one of the witness of the defendant Sh. Chanchal Singh were issued through no process fee was deposited by the

defendant.

That on one of the date presiding officer was on leave though a short date was fixed yet the presiding officer directed to issue the summons for

the service of the witnesses of the defendant on the application filed by the plaintiff.

On notice issued, respondent has filed objections in which all the averments made in the application have been strenuously denied.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that in view of the averments made in paragraphs 3 to 6 of the application, the applicant has

entertained doubt in his mind that he will not get fair deal from the trial court. Learned counsel further submitted that the justice should not only be

done, but it must appear to have been done. Learned counsel further submitted that in view of the stand taken in the transfer application, it would

be appropriate to transfer the case from the files of learned Principal District Judge, Jammu to other court of competent jurisdiction.

Learned counsel for the respondent submitted that this transfer application is filed only to delay the trial of the case, which otherwise, almost is

two decades old. Learned counsel also submitted that as and when trial court took effective steps for conclusion of the lis with reasonable

promptitude efforts have been made to scuttle the same. Learned counsel submitted that it is duty of the trial court to ensure that the proceedings

are concluded at the earliest.

The Court before which parties file proceedings and invite judgments in accordance with law, must act in a manner, which is required from an

authority, who has to consider the claims of competing parties and render judgments. Like all other democratic institutions the institution of

judiciary also survives on the faith of the people. The integrity of an officer who mans a court is of paramount importance.

It is true that justice should not only be done but should appear to have been done.

On presumptuous conclusions of a party, the case pending in a particular court cannot be ordered to be transferred, more so, when the

averments made are of bald and general nature and are unsubstantiated. A general and bald statement cannot become a ground in law to order for

transfer of a case. In order to ensure that the presiding officer of the court is not unnecessarily maligned, case cannot be ordered to be transferred

on a general and mere allegations, as that well adversely effect the functioning of the court. In order to seek transfer of a case on a grounds which

would affect the integrity of a Judge more than routine averments are required to be stated and substantiated.

The grounds made in this application do not show that the learned trial Judge is partisan and has shown bias in conducting the trial of the case.

The averments pleaded in the application do not constitute sufficient ground for transfer of the case.

For the above stated reasons, this application is dismissed. Interim order is vacated. Parties are directed to appear before the learned trial

court on 12th of July, 2011.