JUDGMENT :

Krishnan Ramasamy, J.

1. These Original Side Appeals have been filed, challenging the common order passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court, in A. Nos. 5192 of 2019 and A. Nos. 10250 of 2018 in C.S. No. 360 of 2007, dated 15.11.2019.

2. The defendant in the above suit is the appellant herein.

2.1. The appellant filed A. No. 5192 of 2019, for transfer of the cases pending before this Court, viz., i) C.S. No. 291 of 2007, ii) C.S. No. 360 of 2007, and iii) C.S. No. 698 of 2011 to the file of the Principal District Court, (Commercial Division) or II Additional District Court, Salem, to be tried along with the pending civil suits, in the same Court, viz., i) O.S. No. 111 of 2018, renumbered as CD. No. 01 of 2018; ii) O.S. No. 290 of 2017, iii) O.S. No. 61 of 2018, iv) O.S. No. 86 of 2015, v) O.S. No. 05 of 2016, and vi) O.S. No. 25 of 2019, on the ground of forum conveniens.

2.2. The plaintiff/respondent herein filed A. No. 10250 of 2018, to withdraw the suits, viz., i) O.S. No. 111 of 2018 from the file of the II Additional District Court, Salem, presently, on the file of the Principal District Court, Salem, renumbered as C.D. No. 1 of 2018, ii) O.S. No. 290 of 2017 and iii) O.S. No. 61 of 2018, (filed before the II Additional District Judge, Salem) presently on the file of the I Additional District Court, Salem, and to dispose of the said suits along with C.S. No. 360 of 2007, which is pending before this Court.

2.3. The learned Single Judge, after hearing both the parties, and considering the fact that the parties in all the suits are one and the same and the nature of litigation and pleadings of the parties and the serious allegations, in order to avoid conflicting judgments, came to the conclusion that, it is a fit case, where, all the suits can be tried by this Court. Accordingly, passed a common order, dated 15.11.2019, allowing the Application No. 10250 of 2018, and ordered that the suits in C.D. No. 1 of 2018, ii) O.S. No. 290 of 2007 and iii) O.S. No. 61 of 2018, pending on the file of the II Additional District Judge, Salem are to be transferred to the file of this Court. Apart from the above suits, the learned Single Judge passed an order, to transfer O.S. No. 86 of 2015, O.S. No. 25 of 2019, and O.S. No. 5 of 2016, which are pending on the file of the II Additional District Court, Salem, to the file of this Court, to be heard along with C.S. Nos. 291 and 360 of 2007, which are pending before this Court, though no application was filed to that effect, in view of the fact that the dispute in the above suits is with regard to the same trademark. So far as the A. No. 5192 of 2019 filed by the appellant is concerned, the same was dismissed by the learned Single Judge.

2.4. Aggrieved over the common order passed by the learned Single Judge in both the applications, A. No. 10250 of 2018 and A. No. 5192 of 2019, dated 15.11.2019, the appellant/defendant has filed the present Appeals.

3. Mr. AR.L. Sundaresan, learned Senior Counsel representing for M/s. AL. Ganthimathi, learned counsel for the appellant contended that the the parties in all the suits are situated at Salem, and therefore, the forum conveniens to conduct the case is at Salem, but, the learned Single Judge, without considering this vital aspect, wrongly ordered for transfer of the suits pending before the Salem Court to this Court, as prayed for by the respondent herein. The learned Senior Counsel further submitted that the learned Single Judge, while ordering A. No. 10250 of 2018, also ordered for transfer of the suits, in O.S. No. 86 of 2015 and O.S. No. 25 of 2019, though they are not the subject matter of the application for transfer filed by both the parties.

4. Mr. K. Rajasekaran, the learned counsel for the respondent would contend that the present Appeals are not maintainable, for the reason that the present impugned order passed by the Commercial Division is not an appealable orders, in terms of Section 13 of Commercial Courts Act, By referring