JUDGMENT
M.M. Kumar, J.
1. This petition filed under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 prays for transfer of civil suit filed by respondent No. 1 against the petitioner which is pending consideration before the Court of Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Amritsar (the court presided over by Mrs. Preeti Sahni). According to the allegations levelled, the Presiding Officer has preponed the date of hearing and has asked the counsel for the petitioner to argue the application for interim order. The reason disclosed in the application for the aforementioned course of action is that another judicial officer, namely, Smt. Harpreet Kaur Randhawa who is posted as Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amritsar and is wife of Sh. M.R. Randhawa, Additional District and Sessions Judge, Amritsar has influenced the proceedings because they are related to the Bhabhi of plaintiff-respondent No. 1 i.e. brother’s wife of Balraj Singh.
2. On the last date of hearing, when the matter came up for consideration, some how the impression created was that the matter was pending before Smt. Hardeep Kaur Randhawa, Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Amritsar and the following order was passed:-
“Leamed counsel for the petitioner is unable to explain the date of first hearing before Smt. Hardeep Kaur Randhawa, Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Amritsar where the arguments on the interim order application have been heard and the case is listed for pronouncement of order on 1.10.2004. Learned counsel requests for some time to apprise the Court with the detailed facts.
Let an additional affidavit be filed giving all the details. List as and when the needful is done.”
3. However, it is now clarified that the matter is fact in pending before another officer who has no relationship whatsoever with the plaintiff-respondents.
4. Mr. Jaswal ld. counsel for the petitioner has chosen to argue that the manner of proceedings as conducted by the Civil Judge, Mrs. Preeti Sahni suggests that there is influence exerted by Smt. Harpreet Kaur Randhawa, Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amritsar or Sh. Mr. M.S. Randhawa, Additional District Judge and/or Sessions Judge, Amritsar. According to the learned counsel the non-acceptance of reply by the Civil Judge and her interest in the case shows that the petitioner would not be able to get justice and the suit be transferred to some other Court.
5. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, I am of the considered view that the petition is scandalous in nature levelling wild and imaginary allegations against a judicial officer. It is admitted fact that the Civil Judge who is dealing with the case has no relationship with any of the parties. However, if the parties are related to another judicial officer, then it cannot result in a presumption that there is influence exerted by a relative Judge on the Civil Judge. Such a presumption would be contumacious in nature. Merely because proceedings have been conducted in a particular manner would also not furnish a ground for seeking transfer of proceedings because such like orders are open to challenge in the superior courts. No allegations has been substantiated which may show that there is likelihood of failure of justice.
6. For the reasons stated above, this petition fails and the same is dismissed with the costs of Rs. 5,000/-. The costs shall be deposited with the Punjab Legal Services Authority, Chandigarh. A copy of this order be sent to the Punjab Legal Services Authority for intimation. In case the costs is not deposited, the reference may be sent back to this Court.