IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN MONDAY, THE 19TH JULY 2010 / 28TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 22144 of 2010(O) -------------------------- OP(TR)NO.54/2010 of DIST & SESSIONS COURT, ALAPPUZHA .................... PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- 1. V.GOPINATHA PANICKER, S/O.VASU VAIDYAN, KRISHNA VIHAR, CMC WARD NO.4, CHERTHALA NORTH MURI, CHERTHALA NORTH VILLAGE, CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA. 2. RAJAKUMARI, W/O.GOPINATHA PANICKER, RESIDING IN ..DO..DO..DO... BY ADVS. SRI.P.B.KRISHNAN, SRI.R.SURAJ KUMAR, SMT.GEETHA P.MENON, SRI.N.AJITH, SRI.P.M.NEELAKANDAN. RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- PADMINI KUNJAMMA, W/O.M.N.GOPINATH @ GOPINATHA PANICKER, SANTHI NIKETHAN, CMC V, CHERTHALA NORTH MURI, CHERTHALA NORTH VILLAGE, CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss P.BHAVADASAN, J. ------------------------------------- WP(C) No.22144 of 2010-O ------------------------------------- Dated 19th July 2010 Judgment This Writ Petition is directed against Ext.P3 order, whereby, the District Court, Alappuzha has ordered transfer of OS No.651/07 pending before the Munsiff's Court, Cherthala, to be tried by the Additional Munsiff's Court, Alappuzha. 2. The short facts of the case are as follows : The petitioners herein were the plaintiffs in a suit for declaration of title, injunction and other reliefs. The suit was included in the list on 10.06.2010. While so, the defendant filed OP(Tr).No.54/10 seeking transfer of the suit to the Additional Munsiff's Court, Alappuzha, pointing out that the first plaintiff in the suit is a Senior Lawyer of the Cherthala Bar Association and that may cause difficulty to the defendant. Though the court below felt that the reasons given in the OP for transfer of the suit were not WPC 22144/10 2 justified, since an apprehension was formed in the mind of the defendant, it would only be proper that the matter be heard by another court. Accordingly, the OP was allowed. 3. The learned counsel for the plaintiffs took very strong objection to the order of the court below, pointing out that the transfer was not justifiable in law. He also pointed out that the case was pending for three years and the transfer was sought only when it was listed for trial. Therefore, he prays for quashing Ext.P3 order. 4. It must be said that there is considerable force in the above submission. But, the fact remains that there is an apprehension in the mind of the defendant that she may not get justice from the Munsiff's Court, Cherthala, where the first plaintiff is practising as a Lawyer. Whether the apprehension is wellfounded or not, is a different matter. If the District Court felt that it will be only proper that the suit be tried by another court and accordingly transferred the suit to the Additional Munsiff's Court, Alappuzha, there is nothing wrong with the said decision. WPC 22144/10 3 No grounds are made out warranting interference with the said decision. There is no merit in the Writ Petition and it is accordingly dismissed. P.BHAVADASAN, JUDGE sta WPC 22144/10 4