JUDGMENT :

(Arvind Kumar Mishra-I, J.)

1. Heard Sri Hari Shankar Jain, learned senior counsel for the applicants through virtual mode, Sri Vishnu Shankar Jain, Sri Prabhash Pandey and Sri Pradeep Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Punit Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the respondent no.1, Sri Wajahat Hussain Khan, learned senior counsel assisted by Sri Nasiruzzaman and Sri J.H. Khan, learned counsel for the respondent no.2, Sri Prateek Rai, learned counsel for the respondent no.3, Sri Birendra Prasad Maurya, Sri Kamlesh Narayan Pandey, learned counsel for the respondent no.4 and Sri Radhey Shyam Yadav, learned counsel for the proposed respondent no.5, Sri Manish Goyal, learned Additional Advocate General for the State appointed as Amicus Curiae by the Court, who is assisted by Ms. Anjali Goklani, Advocate.

2. Noticeable that in this case, an impleadment application was moved on behalf of Mahendra Pratap Singh, Advocate who also wanted hearing on point of transfer, thus praying that he be impleaded as proposed respondent no.5. The impleadment application was supported by affidavit sworn by deponent Vivek Kumar Mishra whereby averments were made in the accompanying affidavit and it was claimed, inter-alia, that the description of civil suit as described in paragraph no.7 of this transfer application, describes the suit of the proposed respondent at serial no.1 of the list being civil suit no.950 of 2020 (Thakur Keshav Dev Ji Maharaj Virajman Mandir and others Vs. Intezamia Committee and others) has been instituted by the applicants and others on 22.12.2020. Therefore, he should be heard in this case before passing any order. Consequently, he was given opportunity to extend arguments and state his case before this Court along with other counsels of both sides and the case of the proposed respondent no.5 was argued before this Court by his counsel, Sri R.S. Yadav and due consideration was given.

3. By way of this transfer application under Section 24 of the Civil Procedure Code 1908, the following prayer has been made:-

“(a) Withdraw Civil Suit No.353 of 2022 from the Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Mathura to this Hon'ble Court for Trial in exercise of the powers under Section 24(1)(b) of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908;

(b) Direct to withdraw all suits of similar nature to this Hon'ble Court on the basis of list of cases which may be supplied by Ld. District Judge, Mathura to this Hon'ble Court;

(c) Pass such other order(s) as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case.”

4. The application is supported by affidavit with details of facts of the suit (original suit no.353 of 2022) and for sake of convenience, it would be relevant that a brief sketch of chronological development up to this stage may be narrated.

5. Bare perusal of the record of this transfer application reflects and proceeds on line that the applicants filed civil suit for declaration, injunction and right to worship at the site of Shri Krishna Janmasthan and also removal of the present structure alleged to be Shahi Eidgah Mosque. The suit was registered as misc. case no.176 of 2020 in the court of the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Mathura.

6. It is worth mentioning that the filing of the aforesaid suit was under circumstances wherein by way of the suit some compromise decree passed earlier between parties, to that particular suit was challenged on ground of collusion between the parties of the suit by the present applicants and the alleged compromise dated 12.10.1968 and based upon that the decree passed was stated to be sham and fraud, thus the decree passed by way of aforesaid compromise was claimed to be null and void. It being so, the aforesaid suit was registered by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Mathura as civil misc. case no.176 of 2020 on 25.09.2020. However, the aforesaid misc. proceeding / suit was dismissed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Mathura vide order dated 30