NEHA ARUN JUGADAR & ANR. v. KUMARI PALAK DIWAN JI

Case Details & Bench

Court: High Court
Hon'ble Judges: Markandey Katju
Gyan Sudha Misra
Judgment Date: 2011-02-14
Court Decision / Holding: Transfer petition dismissed.
Final Disposition: Transfer petition dismissed.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

Neha Arun Jugadar
Anr.

Respondents

Kumari Palak Diwan Ji

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

• A Bisht

Case Synopsis & Summary

Transfer Petition (Civil) No. 182 of 2011 under Section 25 CPC was filed seeking to transfer MACT No. 138 of 2009, pending before the District Judge (MACT Court), Gautam Budh Nagar, Uttar Pradesh, to a competent court at Pune, Maharashtra. The petition contends that the UP MACT lacks jurisdiction to entertain the motor-accident claim and also invokes convenience reasons, such as the availability of witnesses in Pune, to justify transfer. The Supreme Court lays down the governing principle: an order of transfer is permissible only where both the transferor and transferee courts have jurisdiction to hear the case, and a party may seek transfer if the transferee court would be more convenient. If a party argues that the court where the case is pending has no jurisdiction, that party should move the court itself to dismiss on this preliminary ground, as there is no question of transferring a case in such a situation. Consequently, the petitioners were advised that they should apply to the District Judge (MACT Court), Gautam Budh Nagar, UP, for dismissal on the ground of lack of jurisdiction before any merits are considered. With these observations, the transfer petition was dismissed, preserving jurisdictional boundaries and precluding transfer when the original court lacks jurisdiction.

Provisions of Law Cited

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Section 25

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

Applicants contended that the MACT Court at Gautam Budh Nagar, UP lacks jurisdiction to hear the case and sought transfer to Pune for convenience and due to witnesses being available there; they argued that if the transfer is appropriate, the transferee court would be more convenient for witnesses and parties.

Contentions of Respondents

Not expressly stated in the order; the decision focuses on the governing statutory rule and jurisdictional principles rather than a contested adversarial submission.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

A ## [2011] 2 S.C.R. 907 ## NEHA ARUN JUGADAR & ANR. ## _v._ KUMARI PALAK DIWAN JI (Transfer Petition (Civil.) No(s). 182 of 2011 . FEBRUARY 14, 2011 B [MARKANDEY KAT JU AND GYAN SUDHA MISRA, JJ.] _Code of Civil Procedure, 1908:_ _Transfer petition_ - _Plea for transfer of motor accident_ c _claim case pending before MACT Court, UP to competent court at Pune on the ground that the U.P. Court has no jurisdiction in the matter- Held: An order of transfer of_ a _case-::__ can be passed where both the courts, namely, the transferor court as well as the transferee court, have jurisdiction to hear_ 0 _the case and the\party seeking transfer of the case alleges that the transferee court would be more ·convenient because the witnesses are available there or for some other reason it will be convenient for the parties to have the case heard by the transferee court_ - _In_ a _case where_ a _party alleges that the court where the case is pending has no jurisdiction, he should_ E - _apply to that court for dismissing it on this ground There is no questien of transfer of such_ a _case_ - _Therefore, the petitioners may apply to the MACT Court, U.P. for dismissal of the case pending before it on the ground that there is no jurisdiction in the court to hear the case, and if they do so,_ F _the court concerned to decide the application as_ a _preliminary_ - _ground before proceeding to hear the case on merits Jurisdiction._ CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION : Transfer Petition (Civil) G . No. 182 of 2011. Under Section 25 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. Vishwajit Singh, Vijay Kumar, Maheshwari, Pankay Singh 907 H 908 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2011] 2 S.C.R. A Bisht for the petitioners. The following order of the Court was delivered ## **ORDER** B Heard learned counsel for the petitioners. This Transfer Petition has been filed to transfer case being MACT No. 138 of 2009 pending at the District Judge (MACT Court, Gautam Budh Nagar, U.P.) to the competent Court at Pune, Maharashtra. The petitioners allege in the petition that C the MACT Court, Gautam Budh Nagar, U.P. has no jurisdiction in the matter. An order of transfer of a case can be passed where both the courts, namely, the transferor court as well as the transferee D court, have jurisdiction to hear the case and the party seeking transfer of the case alleges that the transferee court would be more convenient because the witnesses are available there or for some other reason it will be convenient for the parties to have the case heard by the transferee court. There is no E question of transfer of a case which has been filed in a court\ which has no jurisdiction at all to hear it. ... In a case where a party alleges that the court where the case is pending has no jurisdiction, he should apply to that court for dismissing it on this ground. There is no question of F transfer of such a case. Hence, the petitioners herein may apply to the District Judge (MACT Court, Gautam Budh Nagar, U.P.) for dismissal of the case pending before it on the ground that there is no G jurisdiction in the Court to hear the case, and if they do so, the Court concerned will decide the application as a preliminary ground before proceeding to hear the case on merits. With these observations, the transfer petition is dismissed. ## H D.G. Transfer petiton dismissed.