Mohammad Ramzan Sofi vs Krishen Lal

This Civil Revision petition is directed against the impugned order passed by Learned District Judge, Srinagar on 331997 in a Miscellaneous

transfer petition captioned Krishen Lal Isher Versus Mohammad Ramzan Sofi and and others. The Learned Judge has passed the order which

reads as under.

...I would not like to hear this transfer application and the same is accordingly transferred to the Court of Additional District Judge, Srinagar, for

disposal under law. Counsel for the parties are directed to appear before the transferee court on 831997...

Petitioner in the present revision petition has stated that he has filed a civil suit for ejectment which is pending in the court of SubJudge (Judge

Small Causes Court), Srinagar RespondentK.L. Isher, who is defendant in the case had also filed a suit for injunction before the court of 1st Addl.

Munsiff, Srinagar. Respondent had come up with an application for transfer before the court of District Judge, Srinagar seeking transfer of the case

pending in the court of 1st Addl. Munsiff to the court of Judge Small Cases, just to avoid apprehension of conflicting judgements. The Learned

District Judge, Srinagar by passing the above impugned order declined to hear the matter on the personal grounds and accordingly transferred the

application to the Court of Additional District Judge, Srinagar for disposal. This transfer has been assailed by the petitioner on the ground that

under section 24 Code of Civil Procedure, it is only the High Court or the Principle District Judge who can hear the transfer case from one

subordinate court to another court. Petitioner raised the plea that the Additional District Judge is not competent to hear the transfer application and

cannot transfer a case from one Subordinate court to another court vizavis under Section 24 of the C.P.C. He stated that by virtue of Section 24

exclusive power of transferring the case from one subordinate court to another court vests with Principal District Judge, or with High Court and the

District Judge has no authority and power to delegate the same to any Additional District Judge, unless he gets sanction from the High Court.

No legal assistance is available in this case, because nemo is present for the parties. However, the point is very important, so I intend to dispose

of this, on merits. Section 32 of Civil Courts Act is regarding the delegation of powers of District Judge. A District Judge may, with the previous

sanction of the High court, delegate to any subordinate Judge in the District the power conferred on a District Court by Sections 28, 29 and 30 of

this Act and Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, to be exercised by the Subordinate Court/Judge in any specified portion of the districts,

subject to the control of the District Court. This provision is not relevant in the matter, because, this is regarding the delegation of District Judge's

powers to Subordinate Judges.

Additional District Judge here has been deleted purposely, because under section 16 of the Civil Courts Act, he has already got the powers of

District Judge regarding the cases which are assigned to him.

The main plea raised by the petitioner is that Section 24 of the Civil Procedure Code gives an exclusive power of transfer and withdrawal either

to the High Court or to the District Court at any stage. There is no dispute regarding this provision of law, but, if it is read with section 16 of the

Civil Courts

Act, the position becomes clear. Section 16 of Civil Courts Act reads as under:

...(1) When the business pending before any District Judge requires the aid of an additional Judge of Judges for its speedy disposal, the

Government may on the recommendations of the High Court appoint such Additional Judge of Judges as may be necessary.

(2) An Additional Judge so appointed shall discharge any of the functions of a District Judge which the District Judge may assign to him, and in the

discharge ot thosefunctions he shall exercise the same powers as the District Judge...

5, It is obvious from this provision of law that it is the District Judge who has to distribute the work under Section 16 of Civil Courts Act. It is a

fact that the Additional District Judge has no power of its own to hear the transfer application or to transfer the case from one Subordinate Judge

to another Subordinate Judge except under section 23 of Civil Procedure Code.

Under Section 16 of the Civil Courts Act whatever work is assigned to the Additional District Judge by the Principal District Judge, a/I the

powers of the District Judge are automatically vested with the Additional District Judge to dispose of those cases. Here in this case, learned

District Judge has shown inability to hear the transfer application on personal grounds. He has assigned this work to Additional District Judge for

disposal. I think there is no legal bar to hear and dispose of the same. My view is fortified by AIR 1973 Rajasthan Page 67 at para six, which

reads as under:

... Another contention which has been raised is that the Additional District Judge could not dispose of the transfer application under Section 24,

Civil P.C. This contention too has no force. Under Section 10(3) of the Rajasthan Civil Courts ordinance, 1950 any Additional District Judge is

competent to discharge any of the functions of a District Judge the latter may assign to him and in the discharge of those functions he shall exercise

the same powers as the District Judge. The District Judge having transferred the transfer application to the Additional District Judge No. 2, the

latter was competent to exercise the powers of the District Judge under Section 24, Civil P.C. in respect of it...

For these reasons, therefore, it is held that once the transfer application is assigned to the Additional District Judge by the District Judge,

Additional District Judge has the power to dispose it of under Section 16 of Civil Courts Act read with Section 24 of Civil Procedure Code.