SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1960 Supreme(Mad) 278

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Ramachandra Iyer, J.
Kochadai Naidu and Anr.
Vs.
Nagayasami Naidu and Ors.
Civil Misc. Petn. No. 5261 of 1960
Decided On: 06.10.1960

Advocates Appeared:
For Appellant/Petitioner/Plaintiff: M. Natesan, Adv.
For Respondents/Defendant: V.C. Veeraraghavan, G. Ramanujam, V. Ramaswami, S.V. Padhmanabhaswami and V. Narayanaswami, Advs.

Jurisdiction of Civil Court to transfer proceedings u/s 24 CPC.

Headnote:Code of Civil Procedure, 1908-Section 24-Jurisdiction of Civil Court to transfer proceeding u/s 24.

       

ORDER

Ramachandra Iyer, J.

1. This application is filed under Section 24 C. P. C. for the transfer of the proceedings in M. C. No. 8 of 1957, on the file of the District Munsif's Court, Periakulam, to the Sub Court, Dindigul, to be tried along with O. S. No. 35 of 1958 on its file. The petitioners who are the sons of the third respondent, and respondents 1 and 2 are descended from a common ancestor. The former claimed that they were members if a joint Hindu family with the latter. Respondents 1 and 2, however, state that the 3rd respondent had been taken in adoption by a divided paternal grand uncle of theirs, and that there is no such coparcenary as clamed. Sometime ago disputes ensued between the parties in regard to the possession of certain properties, and they assumed such proportions as to threaten a breach of the peace. The police, thereupon, initiated proceedings under Section 145 Cr. P. C. against both the parties before the Executive First Class Magistrate, Usilampatti in M. C. No. 8 of 1957. The Magistrate attached the properties and forbade either party from entering them. After examining a few witnesses, the Magistrate felt that the matter was one where the questions involved could only be decided by a civil court, and, accordingly, by his order dated 1-12-1958, directed the parties to establish their respective rights in a suit. Even before the disposal of that case, the petitioners had instituted O. S. No. 35 of 1958 in the Sub-Court, Dindigul, for partition of the disputed properties.

2. While that suit was pending, there was a change in the personnel of the Executive First Class Magistrate, Usilampatti. The magistrate who succeeded the one who passed the order dated l-12-58 was of the view that the disposal of the proceedings under Section 145 Cr. P. C. was not in accordance with the Criminal Procedure Code as amended; he, therefore, revived the case. Finding however, that it was difficult to decide as to which of the parties was in possession on the material date, he referred the matter to the District Munsif Periakulam, for a decision under Section 146 Cr. P. C. This order was passed on 6-11-1939.

3. In the present petition, it is prayed that M. C. No. 8 of 1957, now pending decision in the District Munsif's Court, Periakulam, should be transferred to the Sub Court, Dindigul, to be tried along with O. S. No. 35 of 1958.

4. There can be no doubt that, having regard to the questions involved, it would be convenient if not desirable that both should be tried together. The only question to be considered is whether it would be competent to a superior court, acting under Section 24 C. P. C. to transfer M. C. No. 8 of 1957 to a civil court other than the one to which the magistrate referred the case.

5. Before applying to this court, the petitioners approached the District Judge, Madurai, for a transfer of the proceedings, so as to enable a disposal of the two matters by the same court The learned District Judge, while he realised that it would be convenient to have both the matters disposed of together, declined to grant the application, as in his view, Section 24 C. P. C. would not authorise the transfer of a quasi criminal proceeding, namely, the reference under Section 146 Cr. P. C. from the court in which it was pending to another civil court.

6. Section 24 C. P. C. confers a power on the High Court, and the District Court to transfer any suit, appeal or other proceeding pending in a subordinate court, to another court subordinate to it, which would be competent to try and dispose of the matter. The competence referred to in the section is with reference to pecuniary and not territorial jurisdiction. In a case where a dispute relating to possession is referred under Section 146 Cr. P. C. to a civil court, no question of valuation might perhaps arise. Therefore, if it were found that the case would come within the scope of S, 24 C. P. C. the proceedings can be transferred to any other subordinate civil court. Further
































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top