( 1 ) THIS is a petition filed under section 24 of Code of Civil Procedure seeking transfer of O. S. No. 30 of 2003 pending on the file of Senior Civil Judge, bodhan, to the Court of Senior Civil Judge, avanigadda to be tried along with O. S. Nos. 9 and 24 of 2003 pending on its file.

( 2 ) RESPONDENT herein claims to be an endorsee of promissory note from one Mr. Y. Subash Chandra Base of Koduru village, Krishna District, from whom, the petitioner is said to have borrowed Rs. 78,326/- on 8-12-1999 and executed a demand promissory note in his favour on 8-12-1999 promising to repay the said sum along with interest at 24% per annum. The first respondent- plaintiff issued notice on 23-6-2003 calling upon the petitioner-defendant to make repayment of the amount due under the said promissory note. Since the petitioner- defendant failed to pay the said amount and denied the factum of receiving the amount in his reply notice dated 26-7-2003, first respondent on 13-8-2003 filed O. S. No. 30 of 2003 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, bodhan claiming that said Subhash chandra Base has transferred the said promissory note in his favour at Bhavanipet village, Bodhan Mandal, Nizamabad District after receiving a sum of Rs. 1,44,120/- by making an endorsement on 8-6-2003 transferring his right under the said promissory note executed by petitioner- defendant. The petitioner-defendant filed a written statement inter alia contending that he had not borrowed any amount from subhash Chandra Bose and the suit promissory note is a rank forgery, and that said Subhash Chandra Bose has no capacity to lend the amount. When the petitioner-defendant made a demand to the Counsel for the respondent-plaintiff through reply notice dated 27-6-2003 to supply a copy of the promissory note, without doing so, the respondent-plaintiff filed the suit at Bodhan only to harass him since the petitioner-defendant is a resident of krishna District. Learned Counsel for the petitioner-defendant stated that said subhash Chandra Base has also filed a suit being O. S. No. 9 of 2003 on the file of senior Civil Judge, Avanigadda for recovery of a sum of Rs. 1,91,770/- basing on two promissory notes alleged to have been executed by the petitioner-defendant on 8-2-1999 and on 25-9-1999 and the same is pending, in which, the petitioner has also filed written statement taking similar pleas that have been pleaded in the present suit. That apart, it is alleged that there are chronic disputes between the petitioner-defendant and one T. Kesava Rao of pedapudi Village, who is said to have misled and cheated the petitioner-defendant by playing fraud. It is stated that said Kesava rao encouraged the plaintiffs in all the suits to file various suits against the petitioner-defendants basing on forged promissory notes. The said Kesava Rao also filed a suit against the petitioner-defendant in o. S. No. 24 of 2003 on the file of Senior civil Judge, Avanigadda and the same is pending. In view of the same, the petitioner-defendant seeks transfer of O. S. No. 30 of 2003 pending on the file of Senior Civil judge, Bodhan, to the Court of Senior Civil judge, Avanigadda to be tried along with o. S. Nos. 9 and 24 of 2003 pending on its file.

( 3 ) HEARD the learned Counsel for the petitioner-defendant and learned Counsel for respondent-plaintiff.

( 4 ) SRI Josyula Bhaskara Rao, appearing on behalf of the learned Counsel for the petitioner, argued that when the defence taken in all the suits by the petitioner-defendant is common and since common questions of fact and law arise in all the suits, to avoid conflicting judgments, it is appropriate to try all those suits together. Reliance is placed on the judgments of this court in Kanuru Basava Punnarao v. Puttagunta Nageswara Rao, 1999 (6) ALD 707, Nellore Arya Vysya Bullion merchants and Pawn Brokers Association v. Bhaskar Rao, 2004 (3) ALT 511= 2004 (5) ALD (NOC) 347 and Dr. S. Chandra sekhar Rao v. VST Constructions, krishna Distric