Andhra HC (Pre-Telangana)
Raghavendra Exports And Anr. vs Nawaker Enterprises And Anr. on 17 September, 2003
Equivalent citations: AIR2004AP84, 2004(1)ALD283, AIR 2004 ANDHRA PRADESH 84, 2001 CRI LJ 113, (2003) 2 ANDHWR 633, (2004) 1 ANDHLD 283, (2003) 3 ANDHLD 454, (2003) 3 ANDH LT 808, (1995) 29 ATC 309, 1995 SCC (L&S) 469, 1995 SCC (SUPP) 1 311, (2001) 20 OCR 471, (2001) 92 CUT LT 108
ORDER C.Y. Somayajulu, J.
1. This petition is filed to transfer the O.S. No. 187 of 2003 pending on the file of the Court of the Civil Judge (Senior Division) at Surat to the Court of the Senior Civil Judge at Vijayawada.
2. Sections 22 and 23 of CPC read as follows:
Section 22. Where a suit may be instituted in any one of two or more Courts and is instituted in one of such Courts, any defendant, after notice to the other parties, may, at the earliest possible opportunity and in all cases where issues are settled at or before such settlement, apply to have the suit transferred to another Court, and the Court to which such application is made, after considering the objections of the other parties (if any), shall determine in which of the several Courts having jurisdiction the suit shall proceed.
Section 23 (1) Where the several Courts having jurisdiction are subordinate to the same Appellate Court, an application under Section 22 shall be made to the Appellate Court.
(2) Where such Courts are subordinate to different Appellate Courts but to the same High Court, the application shall be made to the said High Court.
(3) Where such Courts are subordinate to different High Courts, the application shall be made to the High Court within the local limits of whose jurisdiction the Court in which the suit is brought is situate.
3. From Sub-section (3) of Section 23 extracted above, it is clear that an application for transfer has to be made in the High Court within the local limits of whose jurisdiction the Court were the suit brought is situate. Since, O.S. No. 187 of 2003 was instituted in the Court at Surat, and since Surat is not within the jurisdiction of this High Court, the application for transfer has to be filed in the High Court to which the Court at Surat is subordinate but not in this High Court. I am unable to agree with the contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner, that since the petitioner wants the suit to be brought to the jurisdiction of a Court, which is subordinate to this Court, this Court has jurisdiction to entertain this application. The expression 'suit is brought' in Section 23(3) CPC relates to the place where the suit was instituted and it cannot be interpreted to mean, the Court to which suit 'has to be brought'. So, the petition to transfer a suit instituted at Surat to a Court, which is subordinate to this Court, is not maintainable in this Court. Hence, the Tr.CMP is dismissed.