IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 06.02.2026 PAWAN THROUGH POWER OF ATTORNEY DEVENDER ....Petitioner Versus RAMWATI CHAUHAN AND ORS. ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHVIR SINGH RATHOR Present : Mr. M.S. Yadav, Advocate for the petitioner.

YASHVIR SINGH RATHOR. J.(Oral)

1. This revision petition is directed against the order dated 08.01.2026 (Annexure P-4), whereby the application filed by the petitioner–defendant No.1 seeking transfer of the suit from the Court of Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bhiwani to some other Court has been dismissed by the learned District Judge, Bhiwani.

2. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the record.

3. It has been pleaded in the application that the applicant-defendant is a party in civil suit titled “Ramwati Chauhan Vs. Pawan and Others”, which is pending in the Court of Additional Civil Judge, (Senior Division), Bhiwani and the said Court is not interested in deciding the case on merits and has pressurized the applicant-defendant to compromise the matter. It has been further alleged that plaintiff who is mother-in-law of Smt. Mukesh Chauhan, Advocate as well as the said Advocate have openly proclaimed that she has settled the matter and the Court will decide the suit in her favour. As such, the applicant-defendant has apprehension in the mind that he will not get justice from the said Presiding Officer and a prayer was made to transfer the suit to some other Court.

4. Hon’ble Supreme Court while deciding Criminal Appeal Nos.1592- 1593 of 2015 titled Usmangani Adambhai Vs. State of Gujarat vide judgment dated 08.01.2016, has held that making callous allegations against the Judge is no ground to transfer the case from his Court and if it is done so, it will bring anarchy in the adjudicatory process and the unscrupulous litigants will indulge themselves in Court hunting. If they are allowed such room, they will not have to face the trial before a Court in which they do not feel comfortable. In (1991) 3 SCC 600, M. B. Sanghi Vs. High Court of Punjab & Haryana, it has been observed that tendency of maligning the reputation of judicial officers by disgruntled elements, who fail to secure the desired order is ever on the increase and it is high time it is nipped in the bud. When there is a deliberate attempt to scandalize, which would shake the confidence of the litigating public in the system, the damage caused is not only to the reputation of the concerned judge but also to the fair name of the judiciary.

5. In the present case also, there is nothing on the record to show that any bias has been exercised by the learned Presiding Officer against the applicant- defendant. Vague allegations have been levelled that the Court of Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division) is not interested in deciding the suit on merits and is pressurizing the applicant-defendant to compromise the matter. However, mere apprehension of the applicant-defendant that he will not get justice from the said Court is thus not well founded and is not a sufficient ground to transfer the suit to some other Court. In case, transfer applications are allowed on such flimsy grounds, the litigants will be encouraged to institute such applications just to get the case transferred. Even otherwise, the allegations are general in nature and vague and learned District Judge while dismissing the application for transfer of the case has also observed that mere apprehension or unfounded suspicion of bias is insufficient to warrant a transfer and such kind of sweeping allegations against the Courts in general cannot be entertained on judicial side while exercising the powers under Section 24 CPC seeking transfer of the cases.

6. Resultantly, there is no merit in the present revision petition and same is ordered to be dismissed.

(YASHVIR SINGH RATHOR)

06.02.2026 JUDGE Amandeep Whether speaking/reasoned. : Yes/No Whether Reportable. : Yes/No