Allegations of bias require substantial evidence to justify the transfer of civil suits; mere apprehension of bias is insufficient, maintaining the integrity of judicial officers is paramount.

ORDER :

1. Present writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner/ plaintiff being aggrieved by the order dated 07.07.2025 passed by the Court of learned District Judge, Jaipur Metropolitan-II (for short ‘the learned District Judge’), on Civil Transfer Application No.112/2025, whereby the learned District Judge ordered to transfer the Civil Suit No.14/2024 (95/2024), from the Court of learned Addl. District & Sessions Judge No.7, Jaipur Metropolitan-II to the Court of learned Addl. District & Sessions Judge No.9, Jaipur Metropolitan-II.

2. The brief facts of the case as per the pleadings are that the petitioner /plaintiff preferred a suit for specific performance and permanent injunction on 23.02.2024 and the same was assigned to the learned Addl. & Sessions Judge No.7, Jaipur Metropolitan-II and was numbered as 14/2024 (95/2024). Along-with the suit, the petitioner/plaintiff also preferred an application for temporary injunction under Order XXXIX Rules 1 & 2 CPC.

3. During the pendency of the suit proceedings, the respondent/ defendant No.5- Atar Singh Bisoya filed an application under section 24 CPC before the learned District Judge, Jaipur Metropolitan-II.

4. After service of summons of the transfer application upon the petitioner/ plaintiff, the learned District Judge vide its order dated 07.07.2025 allowed the transfer application and ordered to transfer the case from the Court of learned Addl. District & Sessions Judge No.7, Jaipur Metropolitan-II to the Court of learned Addl. District & Sessions Judge No.9, Jaipur Metropolitan-II.

5. Ms. Suruchi Kasliwal, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner plaintiff submitted that along-with the plaint the petitioner/ plaintiff filed an application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 & 2 CPC which remained pending for more than one year and on request made by the counsel appearing for the petitioner/ plaintiff when the learned Addl. District & Sessions Judge No.7, Jaipur Metropolian-II asked the counsel appearing for the defendants/ respondents for making arguments on the temporary injunction application, they preferred the application for transfer of the case to some other Court. Counsel further submitted that during the pendency of the suit proceedings, the original land holders/defendants transferred the suit property in the name of respondents/ defendants No. 1 & 5 and in view of the aforesaid facts subsequently they were impleaded as party defendants. Looking to the fact that the defendants are transferring, alienating the suit property and are getting third party rights, there was a grave urgency shown by the petitioner/ plaintiff for disposal of the temporary injunction application.

6. Counsel appearing for the petitioner/ plaintiff further submitted that in the application filed under Section 24 CPC for transferring of the suit proceedings, the applicant/ respondent No.5- Atar Singh Bisoya has leveled serious allegations against the Presiding Officer and so also the Officer of the Company, though there is no substantial evidence as regards such allegations. Counsel further submitted that notices on the application were issued on 30.05.2025 for 07.07.2025 which came to be served upon the petitioner /plaintiff on 05.06.2025. After issuance of the notices, 07.07.2025 was fixed as a first date for hearing on the transfer application. Counsel further submitt