IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 8%! DAY OF SEPTEMBERV:2'5j1.§v»., BEF ORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE 'GOWL*>A Q WRIT PETITION NOS. 5310/20:1.Oz& 8620/I20 " (GIvI--RASPI.EKAI:>' ' W20 SHRI. G JAYARAM ' - " '-AGEDOABOTJT 46 YEARS R/'A"i'..NO.IV'5'0, . "'TvEEIeAEIAIADRAIAH GARDEN PIPE LANE, MALLESWARAM BANGALORE A 560 003 V G JAYARAM V' _.E*'ATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PLAINTIFF AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS and 3 herein are the additional defendants in O.S.No.7212/96. Both the suits are for The petitioner contends that, the property in'ir_oIV'eei the suits is one and the Seine," Whereas' first 7 respondent i.e., plaintiff in
that. the properties involved “‘in.”‘the tWo.V_s’ui.tfs Varefldistinct
and separate, for which, su_.p’p’o:’rtiéisjialso derivevd from the
record of the Bangalore
2. ;’Petitiori’e1f vMisc.No.23/06 under
Section” Before Prl. City Civil Judge,
Banga1o’re”City,. of one of the suits and
for being made over Atovthe Court where the other suit is
~pendiiigi–for,.trialVanddisposal. The said writ petition was
thereafter, petitioner filed
under Section 24 of CPC to transfer
V.,’fo.s.Noe.7_2i2/96 filed by her, pending in CCH No.38 to
p”‘¢cHfifp”.,’Ne.8. wherein O.S.No.6340/97 is pending or
if yi_s–versa for disposal in accordance with law. The said
i
Z ,
/’
petition having been found to be devoid of merit was
dismissed by the Prl. City Civil and Sessio’ns”-liiidge,
Bangalore. Aggrieved, the plaintiff in O.S.No«.
filed these writ petitions.
3. Heard the iearnedfce-.unse1~..and the
papers.
4. The learned .i?1’il.”.__VV» Judge has
misdirected gin impugned order
refusing to. one and the same Court
on three by; making a reference to the
record of and hoiding that the suit
seheduie prope1jty’in thewtwo suits are different. Secondly,
iflvthat”; at different stages, there is no
t.o-grant the relief. Thirdly, in View of the
_ rejection”of-JViisc.23/O6. the petition is not tenable.
if u _ Section 24 of CPC is with regard to the general
power of transfer and Withdrawal. Sub–section (1) thereof
/.
5
provides that, on the application of any of the parties and
after notice to the parties and after hearing such of them
as desired to be heard, or of its own motion without_psuch
notice, the High Court or the District Court
stage transfer any suit, appeal, or other._::
pending before it for trial or to
subordinate to it and competent to try orgldiisposell
same. It also enables the s’uit,HappealV
or other proceeding per1dingCourt subordinate to it
and try or dispose of th’?
6} ._ ,pp1=:§yr1s1ons, it is made clear that, at
any stage’g__of the if the Court deems it
approéplriate either:__or1_’the application or otherwise, a suit
proceeding pending before it or before any Court
can be withdrawn and made over for trial
{and by a Court competent to try and dispose of
V’ “fthei matter. Merely because the two suits are at different
stages, the learned Prl. Civil and Sessions\I%1iige could not
4
have disallowed the prayer in the Misc. Petition. The
dismissal of an earlier petition i.e., Misc.23/O6 does not
operate as res judicata. Depending uporil’
situation, the power under Section 24 _”‘oe’eXerei.se.d_”–..
irrespective of the decision taken earlier “siiice-__su,o,.V_prriotti,
the power has been confer1j€:d4_ upon the
exercising such power, ‘arise for
consideration from be view. If
the trial and disposal… be expedited
without any to either of the
parties:;i”the”s.aid be_’e3s:ercised, despite the order
is contraolrder _
7. parties the suit do not agree that the
prop’erty_lA’ irivo1ve’d.._.iI1.v the suits is one and the same.
PI.:ai’1itiff.__V’iri’«.lC..S.No.7212/96 contends that, the suit
schetiiilel therein is the property involved in
97, whereas the plaintiff in the later suit
‘idcontends otherwise. There may be a record of the
/
/-
Corporation indicating that, the properties are one and
the same. As along as there is no agreement between the
parties and a finding has not been recorded’__’__’b},{:VA’ a
competent Court after adjudication of is
open to record a finding in the ti:_ans.ferj;
property involved in both th’e._suits’.i_s”one the
It is for the Court wherein znattersuiare ceased, to
record findings basedmipon fithye .C’.evid’e1ice that, may be
brought on record duriyngthe cou.rse”of’
8} tttt In ‘rides by the petitioner and
the counter-by the’.V–~re’s«p»ondent, without going into the
conte.ntious”4is.su’e.that, the property involved in both the
‘ ffsuits {is?..,”one..,and Ctheffsarne and since the plaintiff in the
Eater Vsuitais defendant in the earlier suit and as the two
suits are ‘pending in two different Court Halls of the City
“Civil Court, in order to facilitate the expeditious triai and
._fdi_sposal of the suits, it would serve the ends of justice to
-withdraw o.s.No.7212/96 from Add}. City Civil and
‘/L
(
Sessions Judge, Bangalore City (CCH No.38) and make
over the same to Addl. City and Sessions
Bangaiore City (CCH No.8), with a directionof
the suits alongside each otherflmand
petitions stand disposed of as folglows-:’~ 3
The writ petitions» stafid The
impugnedvoidfler ,,gtgiashed.– prayer in
Misc.798/ Prl. City Civil
and ‘Bangalore City, stands
iS
T ‘ 1?.iWe3i T O.S.No.7212/96
pg “the file of Add]. City civii and
seeeioiis grudge, Bangaiore City [CCH No.38)
add aeeigiied to the Addl. City Civil Judge
No.8), wherein O.S.No.6340/96 is
L The trial Court
‘ pending.
[Add]. City Civil Judge
functioning in C.H.No.8) is hereby directed to
C/,
I
iii)
iv]
try both the suits separately alongside each
other and dispose of the same expeditiegdhslzy.
P.W.1 in O.S.No.6340/97 shal1:.~«~~-hepethorosco-
examined by the first defendanft_:”~the.:fei’n
plaintiff in O.S.No.72¥l2 on
of hearing or on the adjourned date the case” ;
may be.
Plaintiff in-.._._.”fpt:he adduce further
evid6_1’_1ce aI).d_..,.Con1P1€te'”‘hei’-aside of evidence
“rno.1’V1th_sV date, the cross-
‘ completed.
1′ Zn’ the plaintiff [petitioner
lhereinlh.’-shallfladduce and complete her side of
evidence””alongside the evidence of plaintiffs in
(4§’.V{?l,l§Io.634«O/97. Soon after the evidence of
~f_pEa_intiffs in both the suits are completed. the
defendants in the respective suits shall adduce
and complete the evidence within two months
\%
E}
Court shali proceed further for disposal of the suitswithin
the period indicated supra.
hrp/bms