HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY Tr. CMP No.471 of 2011 ORDER: This transfer petition is filed under Section 24 CPC, seeking transfer of OS No.265 of 2001 on the file of the 13th Additional Chief Judge (FTC), City Civil Court, Hyderabad, to some other Court. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondents. Perused the record. 3. It is not disputed that this Court while remanding the matter to the trial Court on 17.04.2011 held that clubbing of two suits OS Nos.264 and 265 of 2001 was a serious irregularity and directed that the judgment should be rendered in two suits separately without reference to the evidence in the other suit. It is also not disputed that after remand, arguments in OS No.264 of 2001 commenced and the arguments in OS No.265 of 2001 are not yet commenced. In the affidavit filed in support of the petition, it is alleged that on 28.11.2011, the learned 13th Additional Chief Judge, stated that he was going to pronounce the judgment in OS No.265 of 2001 on Monday i.e., 01.08.2011 and that the petitioners herein represented that they have preferred SLP Nos.20611 and 20612 of 2011 before the Apex Court and the matter is likely to be taken in two weeks, but the learned Judge refused to hear the oral arguments and adjourned the matter to 29.07.2011 for filing written arguments in OS No.265 of 2001. It is further alleged that the learned Additional District Judge insisted that he will first pronounce the judgment in OS No.265 of 2001. 4. It is stated that the SLP Nos.20611 and 20612 of 2011 filed by the 3rd petitioner herein against the judgment dated 17.04.2011 in CCCA No.126 of 2002 and batch, was dismissed by the apex Court on 08.08.2011. 5. When the two matters are at the stage of hearing of the arguments and in view of the earlier orders passed by this Court while remanding the matter that the judgment in two suits shall have to be rendered separately, without reference to the evidence of other case, it is needles to state that the interest of justice would require that both the parties are afforded opportunity of hearing and opportunity of submitting oral arguments. Denying of such an opportunity to either side would not be in the interest of fair trail. 6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances, while holding that there are no valid sufficient grounds to order transfer of the suit OS No.265 of 2001 to some other Court, the learned 13th Additional Chief Judge, Hyderabad is directed to give an opportunity of hearing to both sides and dispose of the two suits separately, in the light of the orders passed by this Court, while remanding the matters. 7. In the result, the Tr. CMP is disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs. ___________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J Date: 29.08.2011 bss