IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR FRIDAY, THE 17TH OCTOBER 2008 / 25TH ASWINA 1930 Tr.P(C).No. 258 of 2008() ------------------------- PETITIONER/ PLAINTIFF -------------------------------------- K.MURALI SHANBHOGUE, S/O.LATE GOPALAKRISHNA SHANBHOGUE, RESIDING AT ADKATHABAIL IN KUDLU VILLAGE, KASARAGOD TALUK AND DISTRICT, P.O.KASARAGOD. BY ADV. SRI.K.SHRIHARI RAO RESPONDENT(S): DEFENDANTS ------------------------- 1. R.PADMANABHAN, S/O.ROHINI, COMPANY MANAGER, RESIDING AT KOTTE VALAPU, KUDLU VILLAGE, KASARAGOD TALUK AND DISTRICT, P.O.KASARAGOD. 2. LAXMI PADMANABHAN, W/O.R.PADMANABHAN, RESIDING AT KOTTE VALAPU, KUDLU VILLAGE, KASARAGOD TALUK AND DISTRICT, P.O.KASARAGOD. 3. SHIVA SHANKAR, S/O.K.M.GOVINDHA BHAT, CIVIL ENGINEER, OLD BUS STAND, KASARAGOD, KASBA VILLAGE, KASARAGODE TALUK AND DISTRICT, P.O.KASARAGOD. THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V.RAMKUMAR,J. ................................................... Tr.P.C. No. 258 of 2008 ................................................... DATED: 17-10-2008 ORDER Petitioner is the plaintiff in O.S. 208 of 2005 on the file of the Principal Munsiff's Court, Kasaragod. Aggrieved by the dismissal of the said suit he has filed an appeal before the Sub Court, Kasaragod as A.S. 78 of 2006. When the matter is pending before the Sub Court, the petitioner has filed the present application seeking a transfer of the appeal to any other District Court in Kasaragod or to the Sub Court, Hosdurg. The grounds put forward in support of the request for transfer are the following: i) Respondents/defendants, particularly the 3rd defendant are highly influential. The respondents are making a propaganda in the locality that they will win the appeal. ii) The counsel appearing for the respondents before the lower appellate court is the President of the local Bar Association and on account of that the petitioner suspects that he will not get Tr.P.(C) No. 258 of 2008 -:2:- justice from the court. iii) The respondents are going on spreading a propaganda and also citing cases in which their counsel succeeded before the lower appellate court and this has engendered a fear in the petitioner that he will not get justice from the learned Sub Judge. iv) The respondents had declared that they got a dismissal of the suit on account of their influence with the then Presiding Officer of the Munsiff's Court. Eventhough the petitioner has a very strong case in the appeal, in view of the aforementioned circumstances, the petitioner apprehends that he will not get justice from the learned Sub Judge. 2. None of the above grounds is good enough to transfer the case from the Sub Court, Kasaragod. Even if the opposite party in a litigation is influential, that does not mean that courts will lean in his favour on account of his influence unmindful of the merit or otherwise of the case. The mere fact that the President of the local Bar Association appears for the opposite party is also not a ground for entertaining a fear that the opposite party will succeed before the court. As for the propaganda, if any, spread by the opposite party, parties may indulge in so Tr.P.(C) No. 258 of 2008 -:3:- many unethical practices and that is hardly a ground for deflecting the course of justice. I therefore, dismiss this Writ Petition even without asking for the remarks of the learned Sub Judge against whom allegations are levelled. However, this will not preclude the learned Sub Judge from requesting for a transfer of the case by addressing the District Judge, if he is so inclined. In case the learned Sub Judge himself tries the case, it is needless to emphasise that he shall not give room for an allegation that he is not impartial. This Tr.P.(C) is accordingly dismissed. Dated this the 17th day of October 2008. V.RAMKUMAR, Judge. Ani/ Tr.P.(C) No. 258 of 2008 -:4:-