The Plaintiff's choice of forum is paramount and cannot be altered merely for the convenience of the Defendant, particularly in civil suits involving immovable property.

JUDGMENT :

SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA, J.

1. This Transfer Petition has been filed by the Petitioner, who is the Defendant No.1 in Civil Suit No.124 of 2021, for transfer of proceeding in the said case from the Court of Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.) Patnagarh, Bolangir to the Court of Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.), Cuttack basically on two grounds. The first ground is she is an old widow, who is struggling to manage herself and is overburdened to look after the case at Patnagarh, which is around 400 K.Ms away from Cuttack. The second ground is, she is suffering from old age ailments and it is very difficult on her part to go to Patnagarh to attend the Court proceeding alone, as she has no other family member to accompany her.

2. Heard Mrs. J. Sahoo, learned Counsel for the Petitioner so also Mr. S.K. Mishra, learned Senior Counsel for the Opposite Party No.1 and Ms. S. Mishra, learned Counsel for the Opposite Party No.3.

3. Reiterating the grounds urged in the Transfer Petition, Mrs. Sahoo, learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits, the Petitioner (defendant No.1 in Civil Suit No.124 of 2021), who is old and ailing, is staying at Cuttack alone, whereas the Opposite Party No.2, who is the daughter of the Petitioner (Defendant No.2 in Civil Suit No.124 of 2021) is staying at Hyderabad. Mr. Sahoo further submits, present Opposite Party No.1, who is the Plaintiff in Civil Suit No.124 of 2021, is also residing at Cuttack. If the suit is transferred to Cuttack, it will be convenient for both the parties to assist the Court at Cuttack for early disposal of Civil Suit No.124 of 2021.

4. Though no written objection has been filed by the Opposite Party Nos.1 and 3 opposing to such prayer for transfer, Mr. Mishra, learned Senior Counsel for the Opposite Party No.1 submits, Civil Suit No.124 of 2021, being a suit pertaining to immovable property, has been rightly instituted before the Court of Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.) at Patnagarh having territorial jurisdiction to try the said suit. Drawing attention of this Court to the schedule of property detailed in the Plaint, Mr. Mishra, learned Senior Counsel further submits, the suit land pertains to Patnagarh and the Defendant No.3 in the said suit, who is the Opposite Party No.3 in the present Transfer Petition, who purchased the suit land from his client, is also residing at Patnagarh. Mr. Mishra, learned Senior Counsel further submits, the Opposite Party No.2, being the daughter of the Petitioner, who has been arrayed as Defendant No.2 in Civil Suit No.124 of 2021, is supporting the cause of her mother and intentionally has not appeared in this case, though notice was duly served on her. Mr. Mishra, learned Senior Counsel further submits, even if it is accepted that the Petitioner is an old and ailing lady, as per the settled position of law, so far as civil suits are concerned, the grounds urged in the transfer petition for transfer of proceeding are not tenable alike matrimonial proceedings at the instance of an woman.

5. Supporting the arguments advanced by Mr. Mishra, learned Senior Counsel for the Opposite Party No.1, Ms. S. Mishra, learned Counsel for the Opposite Party No.3 submits, her client is a resident of Patnagarh. That Apart, relying on the judgment of this Court reported in 2005 (II) OLR 509 ( Benudhar Swain and others Vs. Nilamani Swain and others ) Ms. Mishra further submits, the grounds urged in the Transfer Petition for transfer of proceeding from Patnagarh to Cuttack cannot be accepted as good grounds to pray so. That apart, the Petitioner, who is the Defendant No.1 in Ci