1) This revision petition is filed questioning order dated 01.10.2010 passed by the Principal District Judge, Visakhapatnam in T.O.P. No.1077 of 2010 withdrawing and transferring O.S. No.268 of 2006 from the file of VII Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court) Visakhapatnam to the file of II Additional District Judge, Visakhapatnam where O.S. No.151 of 2006 is pending. Impugned order was passed by the Principal District Judge in exercise of power under Section 24 of C.P.C.

2) Main contention urged by the petitioner’s counsel is that general power of transfer and withdrawal under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 vested in the District Court can be exercised in respect of any suit, appeal or other proceeding pending in any Court subordinate to it and not in respect of a matter pending in the Court of an Additional District Judge which is not a subordinate Court to the District Court. On the other hand, the respondents’ counsel supported the impugned order passed by the Principal District Judge, Visakhapatnam on the basis of Section 24(3)(a) by contending that the Court of Additional District Judge is deemed to be subordinate to the District Court.

3) For appreciation of respective contentions of both the counsel, a reference to Section 24 C.P.C has to be made invariably; and it reads thus;

“24 General power of transfer and withdrawal :-

(1) On the application of any of the parties and after notice to the parties and after hearing such of them as desired to be heard, or of its own motion-without such notice, the High Court or the District Court may at any stage-

(a) transfer any suit, appeal or other proceeding pending before it for trial or disposal to any court subordinate to it and competent to try or dispose of the same; or

(b) withdraw any suit, appeal or other proceeding in any court subordinate to it; and

(i) try or dispose of the same; or

(ii) transfer the same for trial or disposal to any court subordinate to it and competent to try or dispose of the same; or

(iii) retransfer the same for trial or disposal t.o the Court from which it was withdrawn.

2) Where any suit or proceeding has been transferred or withdrawn under sub-section (1), the Court which '[is thereafter to try or dispose of such suit or proceeding] may, subject to any special directions in the case of an order of transfer, cither re-try it or proceed from the point at which it was transferred or withdrawn.

[(3) For the purposes of this section-

(a) Courts of Additional and Assistant Judges shall be deemed to be subordinate to the District Court;

(b) "proceeding" indudes a proceeding for the execution of a decree or order.]

(4) The Court trying any suit transferred or withdrawn under this section from a court of small causes shall, for the purposes of such suit, be deemed to be a court of small causes.

(5) A suit or proceeding may be transferred under this section from a court which has no jurisdiction to try it.”

4) Clause (a) of Sub-Section (3) deals with Courts of ‘Additional and Assistant Judges’ and states that the said Courts are deemed to be subordinate to the District Court. The petitioner’s counsel contended that the said clause does not deal with Court of ‘Additional District Judge’ and speaks of only a Court of ‘Additional Judge’. According to the petitioner, ‘Additional Judge’ is entirely different from ‘Additional District Judge’ and therefore clause (a) of Sub-Section (3) did not deem a Court of Additional District Judge subordinate to the District Court. It is contended that Courts of Additional Judges and Assistant Judges functioned in the City Civil Court unit and not in any District other than City Civil Court and City Small Causes Court, Hyderabad.

5) The Andhra Pradesh Civil Courts Act, 1972 was passed to consolidate and amend the law relating to the civil Courts subordinate to the High Court in the State of Andhra Pradesh. Section 3 of the A.P. Civil Courts Act deals with establishment of a City