TA No.524 of 2011 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH TA No.524 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision: 21.11.2011 Sanjeev Kumar and others ...Applicants Versus Raja Ram and another ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: Mr.Rakesh Nagpal, Advocate for the applicants Mr.C.M.Munjal, Advocate for respondent No.1 **** 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 No. 323-C of 2011 titled as 'Raja Ram vs. Sanjeev Kumar and others' from the court of learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Sirsa to any other competent court of jurisdiction at Bathinda or Mansa. In the present case, the grouse of the applicants is that the brother of respondent No.1 is a practicing Advocate at Sirsa, who he is an influential person and manipulates, so as to delay the case in question. Further the learned counsel submits that the said respondent is the nephew of one higher judicial officer, who is posted in Haryana and so, the applicants have got every apprehension that they will not get justice from the Court of learned Civil Judge (Jr.Division), Sirsa, who is seized of the matter. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the TA No.524 of 2011 (O&M) 2 case file carefully. It has been stated by the learned counsel for respondent No.1 that the presiding officer, who was seized of the matter, has now been transferred from Sirsa. There is no force in the arguments of the learned counsel for the applicants. A lawyer is never 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 applicants should repose confidence in judicial process. Moreover, there is no material on record to show that the respondent may affect the case on the judicial side, being an influential person. The apprehension of the applicants 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. 21.11.2011 (JITENDRA CHAUHAN) gsv JUDGE