The Court dismissed the transfer petition as wholly misconceived because the petitioners were not parties to the two suits sought to be transferred from the District Court of South at Saket.
Prayer for transfer of suits is dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~1
GAURI SHANKER & ANR ..... Petitioners Through: Mr. K. Sunil and Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocates
versus
DWARKA PRASHAD & ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Shivam Sharma, Adv. for R-1
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA
O R D E R
% 13.02.2018
There are six suits referred to in the transfer petition, four described in the pleadings as pending on the file of Additional District Judge (Central) at Tis Hazari, in all of which the petitioners are parties. The payer is for transfer of two other suits pending on the file of Additional District Judge (South) at Saket, they being CS 208560/16 Neeti Mittal Vs. Dwarka Prasad and Anr. and CS 209005/16, P.D. Mittal Vs. Dwarka Prasad and Anr. It was submitted before the Court on 31.10.2017 that the first above mentioned suits are pending before the Court in North District, not in Central District as pleaded. The petitioners concededly are not parties to the two suits which are pending in District Courts of South at Saket, the transfer of which is sought. In this view of the matter, the prayer is wholly misconceived and the petition is dismissed.
R.K.GAUBA, J
FEBRUARY 13, 2018
yg
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the prayer for transfer of suits in which petitioners are not parties is maintainable.
Gauri Shanker
Dwarka Prashad
R.K. Gauba
As recorded by the court registry
A petition to transfer a civil case from one court to another.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
