IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Tr.P(C).No. 199 of 2008()
1. DR.SELVIN.J.PUTHIYADAM
... Petitioner
2. BRUDY.S.PUTHIYADAM
3. ALPHY.S.PUTHIYADAM,
4. P.C.JOHN, PUTHIYADAM HOUSE,
5. THRESIA, W/O.JOHN, DO.DO.
6. U.R.MENON, SINIOTIC SOCIETY,
7. PADMINI.R.MENON, W/O.U.R.MENON
8. ANIRUDH.R.MENON, R/AT.19,
Vs
1. MURALEEDHARAN, R/AT.TCV/1302
... Respondent
2. UMA MURALEEDHARAN, W/O.MURALEEDHARAN
3. LAKSHMI, D/O.MURALEEDHARAN,
4. KRISHNAKUMAR, S/O.MURALEEDHARAN,
5. M/S.SMART ENGINEERING
6. DYNAMIC MARKETING, NEAR UNIVERSITY BUS
7. GARNET POLITECS, ALATHUR DESOM
8. TRANSTEC POLIMER,
For Petitioner :SRI.RENJITH THAMPAN
For Respondent :SRI.M.UNNIKRISHNA MENON
The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN
Dated :05/06/2009
O R D E R
S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J.
-------------------------------
Tr.P(C).NO.199 OF 2008 ()
-----------------------------------
Dated this the 5th day of June, 2009
J U D G M E N T
The transfer petition has been filed under Section 23 and
24 of the CPC, seeking transfer of O.S.No.146/2008 of Sub
Court, Palakkad, O.S.No.70/2008 of Sub Court, Irinjalakuda
and O.S.No.122/2008 of Munsiff Court, Thrissur to the Sub
Court, Thrissur for joint trial alongwith O.S.No.1016/2005,
O.S.No.270/2005 and O.S.No.63/2008 pending before that
court. Respondents 5 to 8 in the petition are partnership
firms, in which, it is stated the petitioners and also
respondents 1 to 4 were erstwhile partners. An agreement
was entered into, copy of which is produced as Annexure I, as
between the 1st petitioner and respondents 1 to 4 for
dissolving the firms subject to the terms and conditions
stipulated therein. Pursuant thereto, as disputes continued
even in respect of the enforcement of the terms of agreement,
two suits were filed by the 1st petitioner as O.S.No.270/2005
Tr.P(C).199/08 2
and O.S.No.1016/2005 against respondents 1 to 4 before the
Sub Court, Thrissur and four suits by respondents 1 to 4 as
O.S.No.146/2008 at Sub Court, Palakkad, O.S.No.70/2008 at
Sub Court, Irinjalakuda, O.S.No.122/2008 at Munsiff Court,
Thrissur and O.S.No.63/2008 at Sub Court, Thrissur. Transfer
of the suits pending before Sub Courts, Palakkad, Irinjalakuda
and Munsiff court, Thrissur are sought to be transferred to
Sub Court, Thrissur, where three suits as mentioned above are
pending for joint trial with those suits.
2. I heard the learned counsel on both sides. It is
submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners
that in all the seven suits the validity and enforcement of the
terms covered by Annexure I agreement, is the main issue
arising for consideration to determine the controversies
arising for adjudication for the reliefs claimed by the
respective plaintiffs in the suit, and, in the suits filed by the 1st
petitioner against respondents 1 to 4 as O.S.No.1016/2005
and O.S.No.270/2005, both pending before the Sub court,
Thrissur, the relief of decree of permanent injunction and
Tr.P(C).199/08 3
declaration that respondents 1 to 4 have no right in the firms
are sought for, and in the four suits filed by the respondents 1
to 4 pending before various Sub Courts as mentioned above
settlement of accounts of the firms, which are dissolved under
the agreement, is claimed as the main relief. So, essentially,
all the suits stem up from Annexure I agreement entered into
by the 1st petitioner and the respondents 1 to 4, and that being
so, the consolidation of all the suits by ordering transfer to
one court and their joint trial, according to the learned
counsel for the petitioner, is absolutely essential to advance
the ends of justice. The request for transfer is vehemently
opposed by the learned counsel appearing for respondents 1
to 4, contending that such a course is not feasible nor
practicable. The learned counsel has also canvassed a
preliminary objection challenging the entertainability of the
transfer petition advancing a plea that the request for transfer
made in respect of suits pending in various Sub courts to one
Sub court would tantamount to violating the legislative
mandate covered by Section 16 to 20 of the CPC. According
to the learned counsel, the institution of suits covered by
Tr.P(C).199/08 4
Section 16 to 20 of the CPC also govern the place of trial as
well and a transfer to a different court, where the suit could
not have been instituted is not permissible. On merits also,
according to the counsel, transfer of the suits pending in Sub
courts other than Sub court, Thrissur to that court would
cause inconvenience and hardship to the defendants. A
further submission is also made that the suits pending in
different Sub courts and Munsiff court, which are sought to be
transferred to Sub court, Thrissur, have been filed at the place
where the registered firms of the respective partnership firms
are situated.
3. I find no merit in the preliminary objection raised by
the learned counsel for respondents 1 to 4 that the powers of
transfer vested with this Court is whittled down in any way by
Section 16 to 17 of CPC, which is applicable to the institution
of the suits. Section 24 of CPC gives a general power of
transfer of all suits, appeals and other proceedings pending
before the Sub courts with High Court or District Court for
trial and disposal to any court, subordinate to them. Whether
Tr.P(C).199/08 5
such transfer or withdrawal of the case to any other court is
necessary to advance the ends of justice is with the court
which is empowered under Section 24 of CPC to pass such
transfer and withdrawal. From the submissions made and the
facts and circumstances presented, it is evident that the
disputes in all the suits are interconnected and have
something in common demanding their consolidation to avoid
loss of precious time of the courts, examination of common
witnesses separately in all the suits, avoiding duplicity of
evidence in the suits and lastly but most significantly, avoiding
of conflicting decisions, which cannot be ruled out if the suits
are separately tried in different courts. It appears that the
agreement entered into by the 1st petitioner and respondents 1
to 4 on which those respondents have also raised their claim
for the reliefs claimed in their respective suits has a decisive
value in the adjudication of the disputes in all the suits. So
much so, I find that transfer of the suits, O.S.No.146/2008 at
Sub Court, Palakkad, O.S.No.70/2008 at Sub Court,
Irinjalakuda and O.S.No.122/2008 at Munsiff Court, Thrissur
for consolidation and joint trial with O.S.No.1016/2005,
Tr.P(C).199/08 6
O.S.No.270/2005 and O.S.No.63/2008 at Sub Court, Thrissur,
is necessary for a fair decision in accordance with law in all
the suits. Transfer of the cases as indicated above is ordered
accordingly, leaving it to the learned Sub Judge, Thrissur, to
decide which suit among them has to be treated as the main
case in which the parties have to lead evidence. Communicate
a copy of this judgment to the Sub Court, Palakkad, Sub
Court, Irinjalakuda and Munsiff Court, Thrissur, directing
them to send the records of their respective cases pending in
their courts forthwith to the Sub Court, Thrissur. Copy of this
judgment may also to be communicated to Sub Court,
Thrissur, which is directed to take expeditious steps for joint
trial and disposal of the suits.
Petition is allowed.
S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN
JUDGE
prp
Tr.P(C).199/08 7
S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J.
——————————————————–
CRL.R.P.NO. OF 2006 ()
———————————————————
O R D E R
———————————————————
23rd March, 2009
