Transfer petition means when somebody wants to transfer his or her case from court to another in

some other state for the purpose of convenience of the party. The party may write an application
for the transfer of the case and the court may approve or disapprove it accordingly.

essentials of plaint: (Order VII: Rule 1)

- name of the plaintiff,

- name, description and place of residence of the plaintiff,

- name, description and place of residence of the defendant,

- statement to effect if either party is of unsound mind or minor

- facts constituting the cause of action,

- facts showing that the Court has jurisdiction,

- relief which the plaintiff claims,

- amount allowed to set off or relinquished by plaintiff of a portion of his claim,

- value of subject matter of suit

S.25 Application for transfer of Suit under Section 25 of the Code of Civil Procedure
- enables the Supreme Court to transfer any case, appeal or other proceedings ;

- from High Court or other civil court in one State to a High Court or other civil court in any other
State.

- power may be exercised by the if it is satisfied that an order under this Section is expedient for
the ends of justice.

- Section 25 is based on the ‘doctrine of forum convenience’ which means ‘the best forum’ or a
forum where a fair trial can be had’. Hence wide powers are given to the Supreme Court to order
a transfer if it feels that the ends of justice so require.
S.24 General power of transfer and withdrawal.

On the application of any of the parties and after notice to the parties and after hearing such of
them as desired to be heard, or of its own motion without such notice, the High Court or the District
Court may at any stage-

a) transfer any suit, appeal or other proceeding pending before it for trial or disposal to any Court
subordinate to it and competent to try or dispose of the same, or

b) withdraw any suit, appeal or other proceeding pending in any Court subordinate to it, and-

- try or dispose of the same; or

- transfer the same for trial or disposal to any Court subordinate to it and competent to try
or dispose of the same; or

- retransfer the same for trial or disposal to the Court from which it was withdrawn.

Return of plaint :

Rule 10- 10B ; Order VII

- The court can return it any stage during the suit when there is lack of jurisdiction in terms of
territorial, pecuniary or in respect of subject matter jurisdiction.

- The judge returning it shall make an endorsement on it regarding the date of presentation, the
date of return, the name of the party presenting it and the reasons for returning it.

- The return of a plaint is considered an order of the court and an order is appealable.

 A District Judge is the Administrative officer to allot the cases to other subordinate judges.
District judge may transfer the suit to Additional District Judge u/s 24 (3) CPC.
 Kusum Lata vs . Anil Sharma Etc. on 7 November, 2012

relief sought: In the present application u/o 7 rule 10, 10(A), which was filed along with the
application u/o 6 rule 17 CPC seeking amendment of the valuation para, the plaintiff
has prayed that the suit be returned for re-filing before appropriate Court and to
pass further orders to extend the interim orders operative in favour of the plaintiff
and against the defendant be continued for one month from the day of CS No.
1519/11 return of the suit till its re-filing.

i. The plaintiff in her application u/o 7 rule 10, 10(A) has also prayed that interim orders
be extended to be operative in favour of the plaintiff and be continued for one month
from the day of return of the suit till its refiling. The plaintiff has relied upon Honda
Giken Kogya Kabushiki Kaisha Vs Riaz Ahmed Khan, 2008 (147) DLT CS No.
1519/11.

ii. But in the said ruling the Hon'ble Delhi High Court has dealt with the issue that what
date would be construed as the date of return of the plaint and the question whether
interim orders can be ordered to be extended and continued till refiling before the
competent Court was not raised before the Hon'ble Court. Moreover, in the facts of the
above mentioned ruling, there was laxity on part of the petitioner in re-presenting the
plaint for three years. The authority on the point involved is Vogel Media International
Gmbh and another Vs. Jasu Shah & Ors, 115 (2004) DLT 679 in which our Hon'ble
Delhi High Court held that:

For the forgoing reasons, this Court must conclude:

i) The suit which is instituted on the representation of the plaint in the competent Court
after its return by the Court which lacked the jurisdiction is a freshly instituted suit
within the meaning of the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure and shall be
governed by the provision of Order VII Rule 10 and 10A. Such a suit will be tried de
move in accordance with the provisions of the Code.

(ii) Any proceedings taken up and orders made in the suit during its pendency before
the Court which lacked necessary jurisdiction come to an end as soon as the order for
the return of the plaint is made by the said Court.

(iii) If the plaintiff on the return of the suit consider it necessary that any interim
protection granted to him under the orders of the Court which lacked jurisdiction
should be continued, he must approach the competent Court with a fresh application
 for grant of such a relief and it will be for the said Court to consider the application
on its merits.

(iv) The return of the plaint for want of jurisdiction whether pecuniary or territorial
cannot be equated to the transfer of the suit of proceedings either by virtue of Section
24 CPC or owing to any other statutory change.

14. In view of the above propositions, IA No. 5668/2004 made by the plaintiff seeking
a confirmation from this Court that the ad-interim injunction dated 01.05.2001 had
continued or that this Court should made an order of status qua as was prevalent on
30.04.2004 is liable to be dismissed.

 Thus, it is evident from above-mentioned decision that any proceedings taken up and
orders made in the suit during its pendency before the Court which lacked required
jurisdiction come to an end as soon as the order for the returning the plaint is made
by the said Court and the plaintiff must approach the competent Court with a fresh
application for grant of any interim protection. Thus, the prayer for extension of interim
orders made by the plaintiff cannot be granted.

**