IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R. No.862 of 2008 Date of Decision:- 05.05.2008 Bhim Singh ....Petitioner(s) through Mr.Rajinder Goyal, Advocate vs. Dhanpati and another ....Respondent(s) *** CORAM:-HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. *** 1)Whether Reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2)To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3)Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? *** SURYA KANT, J. (ORAL) This revision petition is directed against the order dated 23.1.2008 passed by the learned District Judge, Kaithal, dismissing the petitioner's transfer application under Section 24 CPC. It appears from the material on record that civil suit filed by respondent No.1 against the petitioner has been dismissed whereas another suit filed by respondents Nos.2 and 3 against him was decreed. Both the parties have preferred appeals which have since been entrusted to a learned Additional District Judge at Kaithal. The petitioner sought transfer of the above-stated appeals to some other Court on the strength of vague, wild and scandalous allegations that the respondents are proclaiming in the village that they have made “some arrangement for getting the appeals decided in their favour.” It is well-known that the baseless and unfounded rumours are C.R. No.862 of 2008 -2- oftenly spread by the mischief mongers whcih does not mean that the learned Presiding Officer of the first appellate Court is unaware of his duty to dispose of the pending appeals in an impartial manner without any ill-will or favour. No litigant can be permitted to resort to forum-hunting or to brow-beat the judicial officers. The transfer application being based upon totally imaginary and unsubstantiated rumours, has rightly been dismissed by the learned District Judge, warranting no further interference by this Court. Dismissed. May 05, 2008 ( SURYA KANT ) poonam JUDGE