Transfer of suits under Section 24 of CPC requires clear similarity of cause of action or parties; advanced stage of trial weighs against transfer.

ORDER :

This transfer civil miscellaneous petition is filed by the petitioner under Section 24 of CPC praying to withdraw the suit in O.S.No.403 of 2011 from the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge’s Court, Chittoor and transfer the same to the file of IX Additional District Judge’s Court, Chittoor, to be tried along with O.S.No.52 of 2023.

2. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is as follows:

(i) The 1st respondent herein filed a suit for partition vide O.S.No.403 of 2011 on the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge’s Court, Chittoor, against her and another for seeking the relief of partition of the plaint schedule properties into three equal shares and she further pleaded that she filed her detailed written statement in the said suit and the said suit is pending for trial. She further pleaded that she moved three applications to amend the plaint schedule and to receive the documents and the trial Court, without considering the facts, dismissed her applications. Aggrieved by the same, she also preferred civil revision petitions before this Court and the same are also dismissed by this Court.

(ii) The petitioner further pleaded that subsequent to the disposal of the aforesaid civil revision petitions, by narrating all the facts and circumstances, she moved a comprehensive suit vide O.S.No.52 of 2023 on the file of IX Additional District Judge’s Court, Chittoor. In the said suit, the respondents filed their appearance and the same is posted to 04-4-2024 for filing written statement. She further pleaded that the properties involved in both the suits are one and the same, if different courts gave different opinion in respect of the properties, there is a possibility of conflict of judgment against each other and that she filed the present petition seeking transfer of O.S.No.403 of 2011 from Principal Senior Civil Judge’s Court, Chittoor to the Court of IX Additional District Judge, Chittoor, to be tried along with O.S.No.52 of 2023.

3. The 3rd respondent filed a counter affidavit. The main brief averments in the counter affidavit filed by the 3rd respondent are as follows:

(i) The 1st respondent filed O.S.No.403 of 2011 on the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge’s Court, Chittoor against her sister and son, seeking partition of the plaint schedule properties into three shares and to allot one such share to her. Initially, the petitioner was set ex parte, later she filed a petition seeking to set aside the ex parte order and the said petition was allowed and the petitioner herein filed written statement. The trial has commenced and the 1st respondent was examined as P.W.1, the 2nd respondent was examined as D.W.1, one Purushotham Naidu, who is an attestor of the registered gift deed and registered sale deed, was examined as D.W.2 and the suit has been coming up for examination of the petitioner herein as D.W.3. At the stage of trial in O.S.No.403 of 2011, she filed three interlocutory applications seeking to receive additional written statement, documents and amendment of written statement one after the other and all the applications filed by the petitioner herein are dismissed on merits by the trial Court in O.S.No.403 of 2011. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner herein filed civil revision petitions that were also dismissed by this Court.

(ii) While so, the petitioner herein filed the suit in O.S.No.52 of 2023 on the file of IX Additional District Judge’s Court, Chittoor, against the respondents herein, adding the property in the schedule which was sold to the 3rd respondent by Rajamma vide registered sale deed in the year 2011. It is pertinent to mention here that the petitioner herein did not file any suit for cancellation of the registered gift deed or sale deed till now and to circumvent that hurdle of limitation, she has filed the suit in O.S.No.52 of 2023 on the file of IX additional District Judge’s Court, Chittoor.

(iii) It is submitted that the first suit is of the year 2011 and it has reached its fag end stage of trial.