1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR O R D E R Hemant Avchar & Ors. Vs. Pipadharji Samaj & Anr. (S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 6837/2010) Date of Order : 26.7.2010 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SANGEET LODHA Mr. C.S.Kotwani, for the petitioners. 1. This writ petition is directed against order dated 14.7.2010 passed by the District Judge, Banswara, in Civil Misc. Case No. 32/2010 whereby an application preferred by the petitioners u/s 24 the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (“CPC”) for withdrawing the Civil Suit No.4/2009 from the Court of Additional District Judge, Banswara, stands rejected. 2. The withdrawal of the suit pending trial before the Court of Additional District Judge was sought by the petitioners on the ground that the Court is likely to pass order against the principles of law settled by the High Court and that the petitioners are not likely to be imparted justice by the said Court. 3. After due consideration, the said application has been rejected by the learned District Judge holding that there is no foundation in the application forming the basis for the petitioners' belief that they will not be imparted justice by the Court concerned. The Court observed that on mere 2 apprehension of the party to the proceedings without there being any rational basis, no matter can be transferred from one Court to another. 4. It is submitted by the learned counsel that it is settled law that if any of the party to litigation has reasonable apprehension that he would not get the justice from the Presiding Officer of the Court then at the instance of such party, the matter should be transferred to other Court. Learned counsel submitted that the application preferred by the petitioner was supported by an affidavit and no further evidence was required to be produced in this regard. 5. In considered opinion of this Court, the application preferred for transfer or withdrawal of any proceedings from any Court on the ground that the party applying for is not likely to get justice from that Court, cannot be granted as a matter of course. The allegation doubting the integrity and competence of the Presiding Officer of the Court cannot be accepted without there being any rational basis for the same emerging from the record. 6. A bare perusal of the application preferred by the petitioners reveals that there is only a bald assertion made therein that the Presiding Officer is likely to pass the order against the principles of law settled by the High Court and that the petitioners reasonably believe that they will not get justice from the Presiding Officer of Court. No incidents worth the name 3 are mentioned in the application forming the basis for the petitioners' belief that the Presiding Officer of the Court shall not act impartially while imparting the justice between the parties. 7. In this view of the matter, in absence of any cogent ground disclosed by the petitioners for withdrawal of the matter pending before the Court, in considered opinion of this Court, the learned District Judge was absolutely justified in rejecting the application preferred by the petitioners. 8. In the result, the writ petition is dismissed in limine. (SANGEET LODHA),J. rp