1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 14.02.2012 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.SELVAM Rev Appl (MD) No.102 of 2011 MP(MD)No.1 of 2011 S.Suresh Kumar .. Applicant/Respondent Vs. 1.M.A.Ganesan 2.G.Rajeswari .. Respondents/Petitioners Review Application filed under Order XLVII Rule 1 of CPC to review the order dated 07.09.2011 passed in Tr CMP (MD) No.190 of 2011 passed by this Court. Prayer in TR.CMP.No.190 of 2011 : Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 24 of CPC to withdraw and transfer GWOP.No.255 of 2008 from the file of Principal District Court, Chengalpat to the file of District Court, Sivagangai. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Subbiah For Respondents : Mr.D.Sivaraman ORDER This Review Application has been filed so as to review the order dated 07.09.2011 passed in Tr CMP (MD) No.190 of 2011 by this Court. 2. The respondents as petitioners have filed GWOP No.255 of 2008 on the file of the Principal District Court, Chengalpat, wherein the present review applicant has been shown as sole respondent. During pendency of the same, the petitioners therein as petitioners have filed Tr CMP (MD) No.190 of 2011 on the file of this Court praying to transfer GWOP No.255 of 2008 from the file of the Principal District Court, Chengalpat to the file of District Court, Sivagangai. This Court after analysing the reason given in Tr CMP (MD) No.190 of 2011 has allowed the petition and thereby directed to withdraw and transfer GWOP No.255 of 2008 from the file of the Principal District Court, Chengalpat to the file of Principal District Court, Tiruchirapalli and in order to review the order passed in Tr CMP (MD) No.190 of 2011, the present Review Application has been filed. 3. Before considering the rival submissions made on either side, the Court has to look into the grounds on which the present Review Application has been filed. 4. On the side of the review applicant it is stated that this Court has no jurisdiction so as to transfer GWOP No.255 of 2008 from the file of Principal District Court, Chengalpat to the file of Principal District Court, Tiruchirapalli, since the Principal District Court, Chengalpat comes within the territorial jurisdiction of the Principal https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 Seat at Madras. Further it is stated that this Court without hearing the counsel of the review applicant (respondent in Tr CMP (MD) No.190 of 2011) has erroneously passed the impugned order in Tr CMP (MD) No.190 of 2011. 5. The learned counsel appearing for the review applicant has repeatedly contended that the respondents/petitioners have not yet settled in Sivagangai and they are residing at Hosur and the first respondent is a practising Advocate. Under the said circumstances, it is not feasible to conduct trial in GWOP No.255 of 2008 before the Principal District Court, Tiruchirapalli and therefore, the order passed in Tr CMP (MD) No.190 of 2011 is liable to be reviewed and ultimately GWOP No.255 of 2008 is liable to be transferred to the file of District Court, Vilupuram. 6. In fact, the learned counsel appearing for the review applicant has not touched the jurisdiction of this Court so as to pass the impugned order in Tr CMP (MD) No.190 of 2011. 7. In Tr CMP (MD) No.190 of 2011 it has been stated on the side of the petitioners that the respondent therein/petitioner herein has attempted to attack the first petitioner at the time of attending in Principal District Court, Chengalpat with the aidence of a mob. This Court after considering the allegation made in Tr CMP (MD) No.190 of 2011 and also after considering that the petitioners therein are residing in Sivagangai District, has passed the impugned order in Tr CMP (MD) No.190 of 2011 so as to withdraw and transfer GWOP No.255 of 2008 from the file of Principal District Court, Chengalpat to the file of Principal District Court, Tiruchirapalli, considering that Tiruchiapalli is a middle place. 8. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents/petitioners has befittingly drawn the attention of the Court to the decision reported in (2008) 7 MLJ 1012 (E.Mary Oliviya W/o.Govindarajan V. E.Jsohua Milton), wherein the Division Bench of this Court has held that “a proceeding for transfer under sections 22 to 24 of the CPC partakes the character of an original, proceeding and can be filed before the Principal Bench or the Permanent Bench depending upon the “cause of action” or “the reason” for filing such transfer petition. In order to avoid any possible confusion in such matter relating to filing of transfer position, we make it clear that where a person seeks transfer of a case from a place to another place coming within the jurisdiction of one Bench, such transfer position has to be filed before the very same Bench. On the other hand, where transfer is sought from a Court coming within the jurisdiction of the other Bench, such transfer petition can be filed before either Bench, obviously depending upon the cause of action for such transfer petition and the convenience of the petitioner.” 9. Even a cursory look of the decision rendered by the Division Bench of this Court would go to show that this Court is having jurisdiction to transfer a proceeding which is pending within the territorial jurisdiction of Principal Bench and that too to a Court which is under the territorial jurisdiction of this Bench. 10. In the instant case, the Principal District Court, Tiruchirapalli comes within the contour of this Bench. Under the said https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 circumstances, this Court is having ample power to withdraw and transfer GWOP No.255 of 2008 from the file of Principal District Court, Chengalpat to the file of Principal District Court, Tiruchirapalli. Therefore, question of jurisdiction mentioned in the present petition is not legally maintainable. Since question of jurisdiction mentioned in the present petition is not legally maintainable, the only ground which is available in the present petition is as to whether the allegation made in the present petition can be a basis for reviewing the impugned order passed in Tr CMP (MD) No.190 of 2011. 11. As stated earlier, the learned counsel appearing for the review applicant has contended that it is not feasible to conduct trial before the Principal District Court, Tiruchirapalli since the first petitioner is a practising Advocate. It has already been pointed out that Tr CMP (MD) No.190 of 2011 has been filed only to withdraw the proceeding in question from the file of Principal District Court, Chengalpat to the file of District Court, Sivagangai. This Court after considering the fact that Tiruchirapalli is a middle place, has passed its impugned order and consequently directed to withdraw and transfer the proceeding in question from the file of the Principal District Court, Chengalpat to the file of Principal District Court, Tiruchirapalli. This Court has not committed any error apparent on the face of the record in passing the impugned order. Since no error has been committed in passing the impugned order, the present Review Application is not at all maintainable. Therefore, viewing from any angle, the entire contentions put forth on the side of the Review applicant are not factually and legally sustainable and altogether the present Review Application is liable to be dismissed. 12. In fine, this Review Application deserves dismissal and accordingly is dismissed without cost. Connected Miscellaneous Petition is also dismissed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (T&P) /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1. The Principal District Judge, Trichirapalli. 2. The Principal District Judge, Chengalpet. 3. The District Judge, Sivagangai. +1CC TO MR.S.SUBBIAH, ADVOCATE SR.4558 Mj SR : 23.02.2012 : 3p/5c Order in Rev Appl (MD) No.102 of 2011 14.02.2012 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/