JUDGMENT :

A.S. Bopanna, J.

In Tr. Petition (C) No.6/2018, an issue had arisen with regard to the maintainability of the transfer petition before this Court, whereby transfer of MAT Case No.2170/2017 pending in the Court of the learned District Judge, Aizawl, State of Mizoram, wherein a matrimonial dispute was raised, was sought to the Court of the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Kamrup (Metropolitan) at Guwahati. In that circumstance, an earlier judgment dated 13.10.2015 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in Transfer Petition (C) No.23/2015 (Smti. Pomi Sengupta -Vs- Biswajit Sengupta & Ors.) was cited, wherein it was held that the transfer petition filed under Section 24 of the CPC cannot be entertained when a case is sought to be transferred from a subordinate Court of one State to another State though the same High Court was exercising the jurisdiction.

2. In such circumstance, the learned Single Judge, who was confronted with the said issue in the instant case in Tr. Petition (C) No.6/2018 and since the learned Single Judge was unable to subscribe to the view taken in the case of Smti. Pomi Sengupta (supra) has referred the matter to a larger Bench by raising the following points of reference:-

"(a) Whether this Court has the jurisdiction to exercise powers under Section 24 CPC read with Section 23(1) and/or Section 23(2) CPC to transfer a suit, appeal or any other proceeding from one of the four States under its jurisdiction to any one other State under its jurisdiction for trial?

(b) Whether the ratio laid down in the case of Pomi Sengupta Vs. Biswajit Sengupta, (2015) 6 GLR 396 lays down the correct law by holding that this Court lacked jurisdiction under Section 24 to transfer suit, appeal or other proceeding from one State to another State, though under its jurisdiction?

(c) Any other point which may arise for consideration of the Honble larger Bench while hearing the matter."

3. In order to consider the points referred, we have exhaustively heard Mr. A.K. Purkayastha, learned counsel representing the petitioner, who is seeking transfer of the case and Mr. K. Jain, the respondent, who has appeared in person. In that background, we have adverted to take note of the factual position in the background of the provisions as contained in the Civil Procedure Code as also the decisions referred to.

4. At the outset, it would be appropriate to take note of the provisions as contained in Sections 23, 24 & 25 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which reads as hereunder:-

"23. To what Court application lies. (1) Where the several Courts having jurisdiction are subordinate to the same Appellate Court, an application under Section 22 shall be made to the Appellate Court.

(2) Where such Courts are subordinate to different Appellate Courts but to the same High Court, the application shall be made to the said High Court.

(3) Where such Courts are subordinate to different High Courts, the application shall be made to the High Court within the local limits of whose jurisdiction the Court in which the suit is brought is situate.

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 pending 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 to 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 su