TA No.653 of 2011 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH TA No.653 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision: 23.12.2011 Darshan Singh ....Applicant Versus Shromani Gurudwara Parbandhak Committee through its Attorney ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: Mr.Ashwani Kumar Chopra, Sr. Advocate with Ms.Shilpa Malhotra, Advocate for the applicant. Mr.Gurinder Singh, Advocate and Mr.Ajaib Singh, Advocate for the respondents ***** Jitendra Chauhan, J.(Oral) The present application has been filed by the applicants under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, seeking transfer of the Civil Suit RBT No.201/27.2.03/4/9/08/24.6.2011, titled as 'Shromani Gurudwara Parbandhak committee and another vs. Darshan Singh and others' from the court of learned Civil Judge, (Senior Division), Tarn Taran, to any other competent court of jurisdiction at Amritsar. The learned counsel appearing for the applicant states that the applicant apprehends that he might not get justice from the learned trial as the learned trial Judge on 19.11.2011, refused to issue warrants in the name TA No.653 of 2011 (O&M) 2 of Gurmeet Singh witness. The respondents being the influential persons may influence the trial judge, so as to delay the case in question. Further the learned counsel submits that the learned trial judge is acting in a biased manner as he refused to issue warrants of Gurmeet Singh witness on the application filed by the applicant. The opposite party is openly proclaiming that the suit shall be decided in their favour. So, the applicant has got every apprehension that they will not get justice from the Court of learned Civil Judge (Sr.Division), Tarn Taran, who is seized of the matter. Mr.Gurinder Singh, Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents argued that this application is malafide and may liable to be dismissed. He further contends that the case is fixed for today before the learned trial Court and statement of Gurmeet Singh witness will be recorded today. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file carefully. There is no force in the arguments of the learned counsel for the applicant. The respondents, howsoever, may be so influential, but they may not be in a position to influence the administration of justice. Mere presumption or possible apprehensions are not sufficient for a case to be transferred. A transfer should not readily be granted for any fancied notion of a litigant. The yardstick is “in the interest of justice”. The applicant should repose confidence in judicial process. Moreover, there is no material on record to show that the respondents may influence the case on the judicial side. The distance from District Tarn Taran to District Amritsar is not so far. Refusal of court to issue warrants of a witness is no ground to TA No.653 of 2011 (O&M) 3 shift the case from that Court. The apprehension of the applicant is baseless and deserves to be rejected. No sufficient ground is made out to transfer the case. In view of the above, the present application is dismissed. 23.12.2011 (JITENDRA CHAUHAN) gsv JUDGE