CR No.2206/2011(O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No.2206/2011(O&M) Date of decision: 21.04.2011. M/s Holy Faith International Pvt.Ltd. ....................Petitioner v. M/s Luther Photographer and another .....................Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr.Justice Jaswant Singh Present: Mr.Pankaj Jain,Advocate for the petitioner. Jaswant Singh.J.(Oral) Petitioner-M/s Holy Faith International Pvt.Ltd., who is owner of the premises let out to respondent M/s Luther Photographer is aggrieved against the order passed by the learned District Judge, whereby its application seeking transfer of two suits for injunction filed by respondent against the petitioner/land lord and the Municipal Corporation, Jalandhar from the Court of Sh.Ashish Abrol, Civil Judge, (Junior Division) Jalandhar to any other court has been dismissed. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner/ land lord had earlier filed an application under the East Punjab Rent CR No.2206/2011(O&M) 2 Restriction Act,1949 seeking the eviction of the respondent/tenant on the ground that the tenanted premises are in dilapidated condition and therefore, unfit for human habitation. Said suit was dismissed by the Court of learned Rent Controller, Jalandhar. Upon a notice served by the Municipal Corporation, Jalandhar to the petitioner/land lord and respondent/tenant for demolition of the building being unfit for human habitation, respondent/tenant has filed a suit besides another suit filed by it against the petitioner/land lord for permanent injunction. Both the said suits alongwith the rent application were ordered to be heard by one court by this Court in a revision petition arising out of the aforesaid suit filed by the tenant against the Municipal Corporation. Accordingly, the three suits were consolidated. However, the rent application has been decided prior in time vide Annexure P8. The grievance of the petitioner is that the Court already having taken a view, petitioner/land lord does not expect fair decision in rest of the two cases. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to accept the plea raised on behalf of the petitioner. The sole purpose of consolidation of the suits is to have a consistent view which without doubt is to be based on the evidence to be produced on record and its proper evaluation. In the present case this Court is in agreement with the observation of the learned District Judge while declining prayer for transfer that merely the Court has taken a particular view cannot be made a basis for harbouring a reasonable CR No.2206/2011(O&M) 3 apprehension that subsequent view shall be taken with any bias or any prejudice. Dismissed. 21.04.2011 (Jaswant Singh) joshi Judge