1. This Revision has been directed against the order passed in Transfer O.P. No.84 of 2007 on the file of the First Additional District Court, Erode. The said Petition was filed under Section 24 of C.P.C. for transferring O.S. No.21 of 2006 pending on the file of subordinate Judge, Bhavani to the Court with O.S. No.214 of 2007. The learned First Additional District Judge, Erode, had dismissed the Petition on the ground that the evidence in O.S. No.21 of 2006 will be voluminous on the other hand; the evidence to be recorded in O.S. No.214 of 2007 will be limited.

2. Admittedly, in O.S. No.21 of 2006 and in O.S. No.214 of 2007 both the plaintiff and the first defendant are one and the same. The second defendant in O.S. No.21 of 2006 viz., Mariammal, is the mother of the first defendant Gurusamy and Marimuthu, the third defendant is the vendee under the first defendant Gurusamy. O.S. No.21 of 2006 was filed to declare that the registered sale deed dated 24. 2006 executed by the first and second defendants in favour of the third defendant in O.S. No.21 of 2006 as null and void. But in the cause of action column, it has been clearly stated that the first defendant viz., Gur