Final Order 1

Order Details: Other
Pdf Text: IN THE COURT OF CITY CIVIL FOR GREATER BOMBAY
AT BOMBAY
TRANSFER APPLICATION NO.220 OF 2019
IN
S.C. SUIT NO.2667 OF 2018
Mr.Kumar Nanak Rai ... Applicant/Org.Defendant
Versus
Ms.Simran Ajay Lalchandani ... Respondent/Org.Plaintiff
CORAM: H.H.THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE
S. B. AGRAWAL (C.R.No.19)
DATED: 1st MARCH , 2021
Applicant/Org. defendant present.
Adv.Sanjay Sinha,
for respondent/Org.plaintiff.
ORAL ORDER
1. Defendant in SC Suit No.2667 of 2018 has filed this application
seeking transfer of the matter from the said Court to any other Court on
the ground that the applicant apprehends that he would not get justice
before the said Court.
2. On the last date it was indicated to the learned Counsel for the
applicant that the Principal Judge of this Court has no powers U/s.24 of
the Civil Procedure Code to transfer the matter on this pretext of having
grievance against the learned Judge, he however submitted that there is
a judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court which states otherwise.
3. However, although the matter was kept back once, learned
counsel for the applicant is not present and the applicant orally sought
time. It is to be noted that the present transfer application is pending
for the last more than two years and the applicant has been
accommodated on several occasions.
4. Be that as it may, powers U/s.24 of Code of Civil Procedure are
vested in the District Court Section 2(4) of the Civil Procedure Code
1 of 3
01/03/2021
-- 1 of 3 --
defines District Court as Principal Civil Court of Original Jurisdiction
and in Mumbai the said Court is Hon'ble High Court and not the City
Civil Court and thus it would be amply clear that powers U/s.24 cannot
be exercised by this Court.
5. As far as provisions of Section-7 of the City Civil Court Act are
concerned, these powers are conferred on this Court for the purpose of
allocation of work amongst Judges and as such they do not empower
the Principal Judge to transfer the matter on the basis of allegations
being made on the learned Judge dealing with the matter.
6. Akin to the provision of Section 7 of the City Civil court Act,
1948 is Section 10 of the Presidency Small Causes Court Act and the
Hon'ble Bombay High Court while dealing with the ambit of the said
provision in the case of Dadaji Dhackjee & Co. Ltd. V/s. Neelam V.
Rajani and Ors., 2016 ALL MR, 426 and in the case of Smt.Manaharbala
Jeram Damodar and Anr. V/s. Prabhudas Damodar Kotecha and Ors.,
2001(2) MHLJ 477, has held that the said power cannot exercised for
transferring the matters on the grounds such as the one made out in the
present application. The provisions being pari materla, the mandate of
the judgments would squarely apply in the present case as well. In such
circumstances, I pass following order.
O R D E R
Transfer Application No.220 of 2019 stands rejected.
Sd/-
01/03/2021 (S. B. AGRAWAL)
PRINCIPAL JUDGE,
CITY CIVIL COURT, MUMBAI.
Dictated on : 01/03/2021
Transcribed on : 01/03/2021
Signed by HHJ on : 01/03/2021
2 of 3
01/03/2021
-- 2 of 3 --
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGEMENT/ORDER”
UPLOAD DATE TIME NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
04/03/2021 01.23PM B.R.HATEKAR S.G.
Name of the Judge HH PRINCIPAL JUDGE (CR No.19)
Date of Pronouncement of Judgment/Order. 01/03/2021
Judgment/order signed by P.O on 01/03/2021
Judgment/order uploaded on 04/03/2021
3 of 3
01/03/2021
-- 3 of 3 --