THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No:3928 of 2011 ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order, dated 14.12.2010, in Tr.O.P.No.304 of 2000 on the file of the learned District Judge, Karimnagar, wherein the said application filed by the 1st respondent herein under Section 24 (i) (b) (ii) CPC, seeking transfer of O.S.No.39 of 2007 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Sircilla and O.S.No.204 of 2007 on the file of the learned Junior Civil Judge, Sircilla to the Court of the learned III Additional District Judge, Karimnagar, to be tried along with O.S.No.17 of 3009 pending before the III Additional District Judge, Karimnagar, was allowed. 2. Heard both sides. Perused the records. 3. It is not disputed that the three suits are between the same parties and in respect of the same subject-matter. O.S.No.39 of 2007 is filed by the petitioners herein for partition and separate possession and the same is pending before the learned Senior Civil Judge, Sircilla. O.S.No.204 of 2007 was filed by the petitioners herein for permanent injunction in respect of the same property and the same is pending before the learned Junior Civil Judge, Sircilla. O.S.No.17 of 2009 was filed by the 1st respondent herein for declaration of title and the same is pending before the learned III Additional District Judge, Karimnagar. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that as both parties are residents of Sircilla, it would be difficult for them to attend the Court at Karimnagar. 5. It is to be noted that the learned Junior Civil Judge or the learned Senior Civil Judge could not have jurisdiction to try the suit-O.S.No.17 of 2009. The learned District Judge has therefore ordered transfer of O.S.No.39 of 2007 and O.S.No.204 of 2007 from the Courts at Sircilla to the Court of the learned III Additional District Judge, Karimnagar, to be tried along with O.S.No.17 of 2009. It is needless to state that the disposal of the three suits by the same Court would certainly avoid conflict of judicial opinion as the three suits relate to the same subject- matter and between the same parties. The impugned order, directing transfer of the suits from the Court at Sircilla to the learned Additional District Judge, Karimnagar, to be tried along with O.S.No.17 of 2009, to avoid conflict of judicial opinion, does not call for any interference. 6. In the result, Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. ______________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY,J 14th October, 2011. Tsy