Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose from a transfer petition filed by the appellant, M/S. Bihar State Food & Supplies Corporation Ltd., seeking retransfer of Civil Suit No.336/79 from the Bombay High Court back to the Subordinate Judge, Patna. Originally, by an order dated February 15, 1988, the Supreme Court had transferred Civil Suit No.336/79 pending before the Subordinate Judge, Patna, to be tried along with Suit No.1028/78 pending on the original side of the Bombay High Court. The transferred suit was renumbered as Suit No.398/89. Suit No.1028/78 was subsequently tried, evidence was adduced, and it was decreed by a learned single Judge. Appeals were filed against that decree, including Appeal Nos.20 and 120/95, and they were pending disposal. UCO Bank also filed an appeal which was pending. The appellant contended that the earlier order for joint trial had outlived its purpose because Suit No.398/89 required trial on issues not covered in Suit No.1028/78, and therefore sought retransfer to Patna. The Supreme Court heard learned counsel on both sides and considered the facts and circumstances and the nature of the disputes between the same parties in both suits. Instead of retransferring Suit No.398/89 to Patna, the Court directed the learned Judge on the original side of the Bombay High Court to frame necessary issues in Suit No.398/89 within six weeks from receipt of the order. If relevant documents had already been filed or any additional documents were required, they could be filed within two weeks thereafter. The learned Judge was requested to post the suit and try it on a day-to-day basis within four weeks from framing of issues. After recording the entire evidence on a day-to-day basis, the learned trial Judge was to transmit the entire evidence and the record of the suit to the Division Bench for consideration along with Appeal Nos.20 and 120/95 so that conflict of decisions could be avoided. Liberty was given to make a request before the Division Bench after receipt of the record to adduce evidence in the suits for early disposal. The transfer petition was accordingly disposed of. The core legal issue was whether the transferred suit should be sent back to Patna or retained and expedited in Bombay. The Court reasoned that expeditious trial on the original side combined with transmission of the complete record to the appellate bench would best avoid conflicting decisions and serve the ends of justice. No statutory provisions were cited in the order. The decision primarily favored neither side fully; it rejected retransfer but imposed a structured timetable and consolidated consideration mechanism.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Transfer of Suits - Expedited Trial and Transmission to Appellate Bench - Not mentioned - Petition sought retransfer of Suit No.398/89 to Patna after companion suit was decreed; Supreme Court instead directed original side judge to frame issues within six weeks, allow further documents within two weeks, try suit day-to-day within four weeks, and transmit entire evidence and record to Division Bench for consideration with Appeal Nos.20 and 120/95; Held that this course would meet ends of justice and avoid conflict of decisions (Paras 1-2).
Issue of Consideration
Whether Suit No.398/89 pending on the original side of the Bombay High Court should be retransferred to the Subordinate Judge, Patna after the companion suit was decreed, or be tried expeditiously and considered with pending appeals
Final Decision
The Supreme Court did not retransfer Suit No.398/89 to Patna. It directed the Judge on the original side of Bombay High Court to frame issues in Suit No.398/89 within six weeks, allow additional documents within two weeks thereafter, try the suit on day-to-day basis within four weeks of framing issues, and after recording evidence transmit the entire evidence and record to the Division Bench for consideration with Appeal Nos.20 and 120/95 to avoid conflict of decisions. Transfer Petition disposed of.
Law Points
- When a transferred suit remains pending after companion suit is decreed and appeals are pending
- retransfer is not necessary
- original side court can frame issues and try suit expeditiously
- then transmit evidence to appellate bench for consolidated consideration to avoid conflict of decisions
