IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD NOVEMBER 2011 / 2ND AGRAHAYANA 1933 Tr.P(C).No. 410 of 2011() ------------------------------ OS.874/2011 of SUB COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM .................... PETITIONERS: ----------------- 1. HASSAN, S/O. IBRAHIM, THEKKEVALAPPIL HOUSE, MADAVANA, KUMBALAM, ERNAKULAM. 2. MOHAMMED, S/O. ABDUL KHADER, THEKKEVALAPPIL HOUSE, MADAVANA, KUMBALAM, ERNAKULAM. 3. RAMLA, W/O. HASSAN, THEKKEVALAPPIL HOUSE, MADAVANA, KUMBALAM, ERNAKULAM. 4. RASSIA, W/O. MOHAMMED, THEKKEVALAPPIL HOUSE, MADAVANA, KUMBALAM, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.B.KRISHNA MANI RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. SIVAJI JAGANNATHAN, S/O. JAGANNATHA PANICKER, MANAGING DIRECTOR, SIVAJI BUILDERS, AB 12, SIVAJI SAPPHIRE, JAVAHAR NAGAR, KOWDIAR.P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 003. 2. THOMAS T. OLICKAL, S/O.O.J. THOMAS, E.F 12, SIVAJI, SAPPHIRE, JAVAHAR NAGAR, KOWDIAR.P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 003. svs .............2/-.... ...2... TPC. NO.410/2011 3. M.A. SALAM, S/O.MOHMMED HANEEFA, ERA 107, CRESCENT PANDIT COLONY, KOWDIAR.P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 003. 4. ABDUL RAHIM.K.A, S/O. ALIKUTTY, KOTTARATHIL HOUSE, BLOSSOM ROAD, ELAMAKKARA, ERNAKULAM-682 026. 5. C.M. HAMSA, C.C 13/312, PAZHAVEEDU, MATTANCHERY, THOPPUMPADI, KOCHI - 682 007 THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: svs TPC. NO. 410/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES: ANNEXURE-I- TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT, O.S 874/2011 BEFORE THE SUB COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED 25/07/2011 ANNEXURE-II- TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 16/08/2008 ANNEXURE-III- TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 27/08/2006 ANNEXURE-IV- TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION UNDER ORDER 38 RULE 5 OF CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE DATED 25/07/2011 RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. svs THOMAS P JOSEPH, J. ----------------------------------- Tr.P.(C)No.410 of 2011 --------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of November, 2011 ORDER This petition is filed by defendants 3 to 6 in O.S.No.874 of 2011 for transfer of that case from the court of learned Sub Judge, Thiruvananthapuram to any Sub Court at Ernakulam. That is a suit filed by respondents 1 and 2 for recovery of `2 crores with interest being the amount said to be advanced pursuant to an alleged agreement for sale of properties situated in Ernakulam District and damages allegedly suffered by respondents 1 and 2. 2. Learned counsel contended that 14 items of properties, all situated at Ernakulam are attached by respondents 1 and 2, that if ultimately a decree for recovery of money is passed in favour of respondents 1 and 2, the decree certificate has to be transferred to the court at Ernakulam for execution against the said properties. It is also contended that all the defendants except one are staying at Ernakulam. Hence, convenience of parties also require that the case is transferred to any Sub Court Tr.P.(C)No.410 of 2011 2 at Ernakulam. Learned counsel has also a contention that all the transactions claimed by respondents 1 and 2 took place at Ernakulam and even the stamp papers for execution of the agreement were purchased at Ernakulam. 3. If the petitioners have a contention regarding the territorial jurisdiction of learned Sub Judge, Thiruvananthapuram, that question is to be decided by that court at the appropriate stage. The question of lack or otherwise of territorial jurisdiction is not required to be decided in an application under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure. If petitioners have raised a contention regarding territorial jurisdiction, I make it clear that it is left open to the petitioners to raise that question before the learned Sub Judge, Thiruvananthapuram as the law provides. 4. The question is whether request for transfer on other grounds pleaded is to be allowed. Respondents 1 and 2 who are the masters of the suit are staying at Thiruvananthapuram. In Paragraph 16 of the plaint they pleaded that cause of action for the suit arose on 16.08.2008 the date on which the agreement was executed and transaction took place at the office of the first Tr.P.(C)No.410 of 2011 3 respondent at Jawahar Nagar, Sasthamangalam Village, Thiruvananthapuram. For the time being that averment must stand. The mere fact that properties placed under attachment are situate at Ernakulam or that of the defendants except one all others are staying at Ernakulam are not sufficient to order a transfer of the case from the court where it is now pending. I do not find reason to order a transfer of the case as prayed for. This Petition is accordingly dismissed. sd/- THOMAS P JOSEPH, JUDGE /True copy/ P.A. to judge ln