L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J.

( 1 ) THESE five Tr. C. M. Ps. arise under similar circumstances though with slight differences as to facts. Hence, they are disposed of through a common order.

( 2 ) THESE Tr. C. M. Ps. are filed seeking transfer of O. S. Nos. 240, 244 and 245 of 2003 on the file of Principal Senior Civil judge, Rajahmundry, O. S. No. 242 of 2003 on the file of Additional Senior Civil Judge, rajahmundry and O. S. No. 186 of 2003 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, ramachandrapuram, East Godavari District. Three suits on the file of Principal Senior civil Judge, Rajahmundry, were filed by one v. Hanumantha Rao against two defendants therein for recovery of certain amounts. O. S. No. 244 of 2003 is filed by one P. Varaha chandra Bose and O. S. No. 186 of 2003 is filed by one V. Satyanarayana for recovery of certain amounts against the respective defendants. In all the suits, the respective plaintiffs filed applications under Order 38 cpc and obtained orders of attachment before judgment in relation to certain fixed deposits in the post offices standing in the names of respective defendants.

( 3 ) THE petitioner is a third party to all the suits. It is a company incorporated under the indian Companies Act. It is its case that one yedida Srinivasa Rao, arrayed as one of the respondents in all the Tr. C. M. Ps. , was employed by it as Executive (Legal) and was in service up to 2003. It is stated that during his tenure, Mr. Y. Srinivasa Rao fabricated several fictitious bills for payment of advocate fees and advertising charges upto the tune of Rs. 1. 68 crores. The petitioner claimed to have submitted a complaint with the police, P. S. , Sanjeev Reddy Nagar, hyderabad, and a case was registered by the Central Crime Station. During the course of investigation, Mr. Y. Srinivasa Rao is said to have confessed that he has misappropriated the alleged amounts and has in fact refunded a sum of Rs. 95 lakhs. Further, the case of the petitioner is that mr. Srinivasa Rao accepted that he has deposited part of the amount in post offices at Secunderabad in the names of his relatives, who are defendants in the five suits referred to above, and that the FDRs were recovered from him. Thereafter, the petitioner filed O. S. No. 88 of 2003 in the court of I Additional Chief Judge, City Civil court, Secunderabad, for declaration that it is entitled to a sum of Rs. 60,62,000/- standing in the names of defendants 1 to 9 therein and for recovery of that amount.

( 4 ) THE grievance of the petitioner is that while the adjudication upon its entitlement to realize the amount covered by the FDRs, is pending before the Court of I Additional chief Judge, City Civil Court, Secunderabad, mr. Y. Srinivasa Rao got the five suits referred to above filed with a view to secure orders of attachment either before judgment, or after decree against those very FDRs. . Steps taken by the petitioner to get the attachments raised are said to have not been successful.

( 5 ) SRI B. Nalinkumar, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that all the five suits referred to above were got filed by mr. Y. Srinivasa Rao only, as an attempt to make the amount covered by the FDRs. , in respect of respective defendants, not available to be dealt with in O. S. No. 88 of 2003 filed by the petitioner. He contends that if the various Courts, where the five suits referred to above are pending, are permitted to adjudicate upon the encashment of the fdrs. , there is every likelihood of emergence of conflicting judgments. He submits that since a comprehensive suit is pending at City Civil Court, Secunderabad, it is in the interest of every body that the remaining five suits be transferred to that court.

( 6 ) SRI M. Giri, learned counsel for the plaintiffs in the suits referred to above, on the other hand, submits that neither the petitioner herein nor Mr. Y. Srinivasa Rao are parties to the suits and in that view of the matter, the question of transferring the same does not arise. He a

Click Here to Read the rest of this document