Judge reiterating the observations made by the Hon,ble Supreme vs LNA, J

Sri.D.PramodSingh,S/o.Late.D.SajjanSinghAoed5gYears,occ.Vice chairman rno rr"u.ll,El"(p;;;;"iiv i#oye$) 6f vid-vadavini Educational society, R/o. H. No. Ei;: ffit"Jii'fuliiu'-cor6"vsaioaoio Post', Hvderabad ...ResPondenUPlaintiff Petition Under Section 24 ol the C P-C Praying that in the circumstan^ces stated in the affidavit tirti'ii't-'"*in' ir'" Higt' Co'rt ilav be pleased to transfer ih;;i;';i i'r,. inoiition"l-District and Sessions Judge, o.s No. 210 0f 2023 "" rir" or tt" lX Additional chief Judge, citv Ransa Reddy court at L d'i;;r.'il; civil Court at HYderabad' lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit riteo ln supiort'Jitn" pt[ition, ilt.liot' Court mav be pleased to grant stay of ail further pr"*"ii"g. iI d.S f.fo Zf O,Jf 2023 including l.A No.539 ot 2024in the said .un, on'iiu-ii"lJ tne r Additional District and sessions Judge, [""-g" n.ijOV Court at L.B tttagar penOing the present Transfer petition' Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI SARANG JAFZULPURKAR Counsel for the Respondents: SRI A'SANJAY The Court made the following: ORDER I I{ON'BLE SRI JUSTTCE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY SFER CIVIL MISCELLANEO US PETITIONNo.75 of 2025 ORDER: This Transfer Civil Miscellaneous petition is filed seeking to transfer oS.No.210 of 2013 pending on the file of the I Additional District Judge, Ranga Reddy Court at L.B.Nagar to the IX Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. 2. Heard Sri Sarang J.ALul pulkar, learned counsel for petitioners and Sri A.Sanjay, leamed counsel for respondent. 3. The brief facts of the case, shom_off unnecessary details, required for adjudication of this Tr.C.M.p., as averred in the affidavit filed in suppoft of the TrcMp, are that the petitioners and respondent along with one Vinod Singh and Subodh Singh are sons of Late Sri Sajjan Singh and Smt Taramathi Singh; thar rheir parents acquired several properties during their lifetime and thev also formed a society by name ,Vidya Dayini Educational Society, with registered office in premises bearing No.gA, Old Santosh Nagar Colony, Near Saidabad, Hyderabad; that their mother expired on 15.07 .2007 and their fath er passed away on 07.07.2020; that the above property is a joint family property; that differences LNA' J T{MP.No.75 of 2025 2 arose between the brothers with regard to management of the properties; and that a suit in OS'No'200 of 2020 is fited by the petitioners before the IX Additional Chief Judge' City Civil Court' Hyderabad, wherein they sought for partition of joint family properties and also for cancellation of gift deeds bearing Nos.4989/2016, dated 07' 10'2016 Nd 46212014', dared 17 '04'2014' executed by their father in lavour of respondent and his wife and the said suit is pending' While the matters stood thus' the respondent filed OP'No'14 of 2020 challenging his removal from Vidyadayini Educational Society and he also filed OS'No'210 of 2023 beforethe I Additional District Judge' Ranga Reddy Court at L.B.Nagar for eviction, recovery of arrears and mesne profits against petitioners herein though he was aware of pendency of suit in OS.No.200 of 2020 filed by petitioners; that one of the schedule subject matter of suit- propertles ln OS.No.210 of 2023 OS.No.200 of 2020,wherein the trial Court has also granted status quo orders, therefore, continuation of OS'No'210 of 2023 before the I Additional District Judge, Ranga Reddy Court at L'B'Nagar would result in conflict of judgments and hence, the present 1S Tr.C.M.P. is filed I i I I I t l 'i @-... : i":' ./ ',/ 3 LNA, J T.CMP.N1.TS of 2025

4. Learned counse[ for petitioners submitted that the suit fired by petitioners in OS.No.200 of 2020 is a comprehensive suit which also includes the property mentioned in oS.No.2r0 of 2023, however, the respondent, despite having knowledge that a comprehensive suit is filed by petitioners and the same is pending, has f,led OS.No.2I0 of 2023. He fuither submitted rhat if both the said suits are pursued independently, there is every possibility of passing conflicting judgments, which unnecessarily would lead to multiplicity of litigation and also would render the judgments passed therein, if the sarne are in conflict with each other, impossible to be executed by initiating Ep proceedings. 5. Learned counsel for petitioners in support of his contentions, relied upon the judgment of the erstwhile combined High Court of Telangana and Andhra pradesh in G.B.prasanna Vs, M'D'vedanayaki (died) and anothert , wherein a rearned singre Judge held that when the property involved in two suits is common, the Court can exercise powers under Section 24 CpC to withdraw and transfer the pending suit from one Court to another. ' 2018(6) ALD 604 LNA' J T.CMP.No,75 oI2025 a, 4

6. Per contra, leamed counsel for respondent submitted that the property, which is subject matter of OS'N o'210 of 2023 is situated at Saroomagar, which is within the territoriai jurisdiction of Ranga Reddy Court, therefore, the respondent filed the suit before the Court having jurisdiction to a judicate the matter and as such' the same cannot be transferred to the Court of IX Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad' as sought for by petitioners' which obviously has no territorial jurisdiction to entertain the said suit and accordingly, prayed to dismiss the Tr'C'M'P' 7. Perusal of record discloses that petitioners filed suit in OS.No.200 of 2020 seeking for partition of various joint family properties which include one of the properties which is subject matter of OS.N o.210 of 2023 'It is also evident from record that the suit filed by petitioners in OS'No'200 of 2020 is a comprehensive suit, wherein the relief of cancellation of the gift deeds executed by the father of petitioners and respondent in favour of respondent and his wife is also sought for, whereas the suit filed by respondent in OS.No.210 of 2023 is for eviction' affears of rent and mesne profits in respect of one of the joint family properties' Admittedly' .e.porldJrrt filed suit-OS'No.2l0 of 2023 thee years after filing of / I I I t, {,'.. I 5 LNA, J T.CMP.No.TS of2025 the suit by petitioners. The only contention raised by respondent is that rhe property which is subject matter of oS.No.2 10 0f 2023 is situated within the territorial jurisdiction of Ranga Reddy Court. therefore, the said suit cannot be transfened. 8. It is pertinent to rriention that one of the properties in oS.No.2l0 of 2023 is subject matter of os.No .200 of 2020 and, as rightly pointed out by reamed counser for petitioners, there is every possibility of passing conflicting judgments if the said suits are tried and disposed of by different coufts, which unnecessariry would lead to multiplicity of litigation. 9. In G.V.prasanna's case (cited supra), the leamed single Judge reiterating the observations made by the Hon,ble Supreme Court in Kulwinder Kaur @ Kulwinder Gurcharan Singh Vs. Kandi Friends Etlucation Trust and others2 held that when the property is one and the same, the Court may exercise its inherent discretion to avoid conflicting judgments and convenience of parties is one of the consideration to exercise the power under Section 24 CpC 'z lzoos; I scc oss LNA, J TrCMP.No.75 012025 c 6

10. The said judgment is squarely applicabte to the present case' since the subject matter of OS'N o'210 of 2023' filed by respondent' is shown as one of the suit schedule properties in the earlier suit- OS.No.200 of 2000 filed by petitioners' 11. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and in the light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Kulwind.er Kaur @ Kulwinder Gurchuran Singh's case (cited supra), this Court exercises its discretionary power to transfer the suit as sought for in this Tr'C'M'P' 12. Accordingly, this Tr'C'M'P' is allowed and OS'No'210 of 2023 pending on the file of the I Additional District Judge' Ranga Reddy Court at L'B'Nagar is transfened to the IX Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad' for disposal in accordance with law' 13. The I Additional District Judge' Ranga Reddy Court at L.B.Nagar, shall transmit the entire original record in OS'No'210 of 2023 duly indexed, to the IX Additional Chief Judge' City Civil Court, Hyderabad, preferably within a period of one month from the daL of receipt ol a copy ol this order' \./ \ ! i ) 7 r,cMP.N,.?s:llil

14. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs. //TRUE COPYII s . OSMAN ALI BAIG TANT REGISTRAR CTION OFFICER To, ] fhe tAdditionat Dist l p;l ifil*$t*iflt''ilf,!f' #f[i:',n'?:ur 5. two CD Copies a L B Nasar NyB/sh W, HIGH COURT DATED:12 tOBtzOzS ORDER TRCMP.N o.TS of 2025 ,'-- :.'i;''t 1B SEP UU5 J{ '// * r) :- rrI 'iC ALLOWNG THE TRASFER CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION q v