TA Nos.227, 231, 232 and 233 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (1) TA No.227 of 2010 Date of decision : 23.03.2011 Ch. Prahlad Kumar ...Applicant Versus Ashok Kumar and others ...Respondents (2) TA No.231 of 2010 Ch. Prahlad Kumar ...Applicant Versus Amar Kumar and others ...Respondents (3) TA No.232 of 2010 Ch. Prahlad Kumar ...Applicant Versus Ashok Kumar and others ...Respondents (4) TA No.233 of 2010 Ch. Prahlad Kumar ...Applicant Versus Amar Kumar and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: Mr. Vikram Singh Dhakla, Advocate for the applicant. TA Nos.227, 231, 232 and 233 of 2010 2 Mr. C.L. Katyal, Ms. Anju Arora and Mr. Rajan Bansal, Advocates, for the respondents. JITENDRA CHAUHAN, J. (Oral) 1. Four transfer applications, viz., TA Nos.227, 231, 232 and 233 of 2011, are being disposed of by this order, as the common questions of law and fact are involved therein. 2. The prayer in these applications is for transfer of the suits pending between the parties bearing No.74-1 dated 24.2.2007 titled as ‘Ashok Kumar etc. Vs. Surja Ram Memorial Foundation & others’; No.139-1 dated 7.4.2007 titled as ‘Bimla Devi Vs. Ashok Kumar & others’; No.74-1 dated 24.2.2007 titled as ‘Ashok Kumar Vs. Sharda Kadan & others’; and No.386 dated 3.8.2006 titled as ‘Amar Kumar Vs. Prahlad Kumar & others’; from the Court of learned Additional Civi Judge (SD), Malaut, to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Karnal. 3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 4. The only ground for seeking transfer of the aforementioned civil suits from Malaut to Karnal is that the applicant is a disabled person and on wheel chair. He is presently residing at Karnal and, therefore, it would be difficult for him to defend his case at Malaut. 5. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent has referred to T.A. No.293 of 2008 filed by the applicant herein TA Nos.227, 231, 232 and 233 of 2010 3 seeking transfer of six suits out of which four are sought to be transferred by way of the present application. The said T.A. No.293 of 2008 was disposed of vide order dated 30.10.2008 (Annexure R-1), by this Court, while remitting back the cases to the learned District Judge, Faridkot, with the direction to decide the same within a period of one month. Another transfer application bearing T.A. No.162 of 2009 was preferred by the wife of the applicant herein, which was subsequently dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 25.09.2009 (Annexure R-2). 6. From the perusal of the record, it further emerges that all the allegations projected in the applications pertain prior to the year 2008. 7. Merely the fact that the applicant has shifted to Karnal is not a sufficient ground to all the applications particularly, when the applicant is a permanent residing of Malaut, the property in dispute is situated at Malaut and all the transactions took place at Malaut itself. Moreover, there is no averment in the application that the applicant has permanently shifted to Karnal. 8. In the circumstances, I find no merit in the present applications. 9. Dismissed. 23.03.2011 (JITENDRA CHAUHAN) atulsethi JUDGE Note : Whether to be referred to Reporter ? Yes / No