THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.4836 OF 2011 DATED 18TH NOVEMBER, 2011 BETWEEN Madishetti Mohan Rao …Petitioner And Madishetti Narsing Rao …Respondent THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.4836 OF 2011 O R D E R The unsuccessful petitioner in Transfer O.P.No.321 of 2011 being the plaintiff in O.S.No.73 of 2009 on the file of the learned Junior Civil Judge, Medak, filed this revision petition aggrieved by the order dated 13.09.2011 passed by the learned Principal District Judge, Medak at Sangareddy, dismissing the Transfer O.P. The suit was initially filed before the learned Junior Civil Judge at Siddipet and was numbered as O.S.No.62 of 2004. Upon transfer to the file of the learned Junior Civil Judge at Medak it was re-numbered as O.S.No.73 of 2009. The transfer was at the behest of the defendant in the suit who alleged that he would not get justice before the Court in which the suit was instituted. Upon such transfer, the petitioner/plaintiff entered appearance through counsel while the defendant appeared as a party-in-person. The affidavit filed in support of Transfer O.P.No.321 of 2011 reflects that the only ground for seeking re-transfer of the suit to the file of the learned Junior Civil Judge at Siddipet is that the plaintiff is a resident of Chinnakodur Village which is at a distance of more than 80 K.Ms. from Medak. Another reason pressed into service is that the defendant was protracting the proceedings. The learned District Judge was of the opinion that it would not set a good example to transfer the matter, which was already subjected to transfer earlier, on the ground there was a changed circumstance. With regard to the grievance of the petitioner/ plaintiff that the hearing of the matter was being delayed, the learned District Judge opined that necessary relief could be sought from the Court itself in this regard and that transfer of the suit was not the remedy. It is no doubt true that Section 24(1)(b)(iii) of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) authorizes the High Court or the District Court to re- transfer the matter for trial or disposal to the Court from which it was earlier withdrawn. However, exercise of this power would have to be conditioned by necessary concomitant circumstances. It would not be for the mere asking that a suit which was transferred from the file of a particular Court would be re-transferred to such Court. The earlier application for transfer having been accepted on the ground that the defendant’s apprehension that he may not get justice before that Court was established, it would not be open to either party to seek re-transfer on the ground that such a reason no longer survives owing to the change of the Judicial Officer. Further, distance of the Court from the place of the party’s residence generally would not be a ground for permitting transfer of the suit under Section 24 CPC [KALPANA DEVI PRAKASH THAKAR v. DEVIPRAKASH THAKAR (DR)[1]]. In that view of the matter, this Court finds no error in the order passed by the learned District Judge, Medak at Sangareddy, dismissing transfer O.P.No.321 of 2011. The Civil Revision Petition is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. ---------------------------- SANJAY KUMAR, J. 18TH NOVEMBER, 2011. PGS/VGSR [1] (1996) 11 SCC 96