Bombay High Court Allows Transfer of Suit from Kolhapur to Bombay Due to Applicant's Ill Health and Respondent's Alternate Address. Transfer Granted Under Section 24(1)(b)(i) CPC as Balance of Convenience Favored Applicant, Who Was 76 and Suffering from Diabetes, While Respondent Had a Mumbai Address.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: BOMBAY In Favour of Accused
  • 186
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The applicant, Shri Ganpat D. Kulthe, aged 76 and a retired individual suffering from diabetes, filed a Miscellaneous Civil Application under Section 24(1)(b)(i) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking transfer of Special Civil Suit No.134 of 2011 from the Court of 3rd Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Kolhapur to the High Court of Bombay. The suit was originally filed by the respondent, Shri Hasansaheb Miyalal Mushrif, a former Minister of State and sitting Member of the Legislative Assembly, Maharashtra, claiming damages of Rs.1,00,05,000/-. The applicant had already filed his written statement. The applicant contended that the suit had been listed about 33 times, with the respondent present only on three occasions, and costs had been imposed on the respondent for repeated adjournments. The applicant argued that his poor health, evidenced by medical reports and a blood report showing heavy diabetes, made it difficult for him to travel to Kolhapur for hearings. Additionally, the respondent had an alternate address in Mumbai near Mantralaya, making it convenient for him to attend court in Bombay. The respondent opposed the transfer, but the court, considering the applicant's age and health, the respondent's alternate address in Bombay, and the fact that the respondent frequently visited Bombay for legislative work, found it just and convenient to transfer the suit. The court allowed the application and ordered the transfer of Special Civil Suit No.134 of 2011 from Kolhapur to the Bombay High Court for trial.

Headnote

A) Civil Procedure - Transfer of Suit - Section 24(1)(b)(i) Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Transfer on Grounds of Health and Convenience - Applicant, aged 76 and suffering from diabetes, sought transfer of suit from Kolhapur to Bombay - Respondent, a sitting MLA, had alternate address in Bombay - Court held that transfer was warranted to balance convenience, especially given applicant's health and respondent's frequent presence in Bombay - Held that transfer allowed (Paras 1-5).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the suit pending in Kolhapur should be transferred to Bombay under Section 24(1)(b)(i) CPC on grounds of the applicant's ill health and the respondent's alternate address in Bombay.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Miscellaneous Civil Application is allowed. Special Civil Suit No.134 of 2011 pending in the Court of 3rd Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Kolhapur is transferred to the High Court of Bombay for trial. No order as to costs.

Law Points

  • Transfer of suit
  • Section 24 CPC
  • convenience of parties
  • health grounds
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2016 LawText (BOM) (02) 89

MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO.137 OF 2015

2016-02-09

R.D. Dhanuka, J.

Mr. Sagar Rane for the Applicant, Mr. Shriniwas Patwardhan for the Respondent

Shri Ganpat D. Kulthe

Shri Hasansaheb Miyalal Mushrif

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Miscellaneous Civil Application for transfer of a civil suit from one court to another.

Remedy Sought

Transfer of Special Civil Suit No.134 of 2011 from the Court of 3rd Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Kolhapur to the High Court of Bombay.

Filing Reason

Applicant's advanced age (76 years) and poor health (diabetes) making travel to Kolhapur difficult; respondent's alternate address in Mumbai.

Previous Decisions

The suit had been listed about 33 times; respondent present only on three occasions; costs imposed on respondent for adjournments.

Issues

Whether the suit should be transferred from Kolhapur to Bombay under Section 24(1)(b)(i) CPC on grounds of the applicant's health and the respondent's alternate address.

Submissions/Arguments

Applicant: Aged 76, suffering from diabetes, medical reports annexed; respondent has alternate address in Mumbai near Mantralaya; respondent frequently visits Bombay for legislative work. Respondent: Opposed the transfer (no specific arguments detailed in judgment).

Ratio Decidendi

Transfer of a suit under Section 24 CPC is warranted when the balance of convenience favors the applicant, especially considering the applicant's advanced age and health issues, and the respondent's alternate address in the city where transfer is sought, making it convenient for both parties.

Judgment Excerpts

By this Miscellaneous Civil Application, the applicant seeks transfer of Special Civil Suit No.134 of 2011, which is pending in the Court of 3rd Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Kolhapur to this Court in exercise of powers under section 24(1)(b)(i) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The applicant has been suffering from diabetes for quite some time and is required to take medical treatment regularly. In my view, it would be just and convenient to transfer the said suit from Kolhapur to this Court.

Procedural History

The respondent filed Special Civil Suit No.134 of 2011 in the Court of 3rd Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Kolhapur claiming damages. The applicant filed a written statement. The suit was listed about 33 times with the respondent present only thrice. Costs were imposed on the respondent for adjournments. The applicant then filed this Miscellaneous Civil Application No.137 of 2015 for transfer of the suit to the Bombay High Court.

Acts & Sections

  • Code of Civil Procedure, 1908: Section 24(1)(b)(i)
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Karnataka High Court Dharwad Bench Dismisses Petition Challenging Notification for Gram Panchayat Election Due to Non-Constitution of Panchayat. Court Rules That Two-Thirds Majority Under Section 5(7) of Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act, 1...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Adoption Petition, Sets Aside Custody Order in Favor of Adoptive Parents — Deed of Adoption Valid Under Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956 Despite Lack of Witnesses and Registration.