High Court · 2025

THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASOrder reserved on : 28.08.2025Order pronounced on : .09.2025CORAM THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.BALAJITr.CMP.No.991 of 2024& CMP.No.21709 of 2024R.Sridhar..PetitionerVs.A/M Bashyakara Adhi Chenna Kesava Perumal TempleRep. by its Executive Officer,Chennai – 600 033...RespondentPrayer: Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 24 of CPC, to withdrawn A.S.No.182 of 2024 pending on the file 20th Additional City Civil Court, Chennai and transfer the same to be heard along with A.S.Nos, 199, 120, 121 and 122 of 2024 pending on the file of the 1st Additional City Civil Court, Chennai.For Petitioner: Mr.V.V.SathyaFor Respondent: Mr.A.K.Sriram Senior Counsel for M/s.A.S.Kailasam and Associates1/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ORDERThe Transfer petition has been filed by the appellant in A.S.No. 182 of 2024 pending on the file of the XX Additional City Civil Court, Chennai seeking transfer of the said appeal to be heard along with A.S.Nos.199, 120, 121 and 122 of 2024, which are pending on the file of the I Additional City Civil Court, Chennai. 2.I initially heard Mr.V.V.Sathya, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.A.K.Sriram, learned Senior Counsel for A.S.Kailasam and Associates, for the respondent/Temple.3.In fact, after the transfer CMP came to be filed and the respondent appeared in the proceedings, Mr.A.K.Sriram, learned Senior Counsel had mentioned that there are totally 10 appeals pending in respect of the respondent's/Temple's properties and contending that all these 10 suits were disposed of by a single Court / Judge, but appeals therefrom have gone to different Courts, he requested me to club all the 10 appeals to be heard by any one competent Court. Finding the said representation bona fide, I ordered notice to be issued to the counsel for the appellants in all the other appeals, 2/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis which were not subject matter of this transfer CMP. Accordingly, the counsel appearing for the appellants in the other appeals, namely A.S.Nos.199, 120, 121 and 122 of 2024 and A.S.Nos.112, 213, 179, 191 and 133 of 2024, have been put on notice and they have also appeared and made their submissions.4.I have heard Mr.V.V.Sathya, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.A.K.Sriram, learned Senior Counsel for the respondent and Mr.C.Umashankar, Mr.S.Vasudevan, Mr.Nandhakumar, Mr.M.L.Ramesh, M/s.Sarvabhauman Associates and Mr.Sunil Kumar for the appellants in the connected appeal suits. 5.The learned counsel for the appellants excepting Mr.Nandakumar, learned counsel for the appellant in A.S.No.213 of 2024 and A.S.No. 191 of 2024, have no serious objection for clubbing of all the appeals, to be heard together by a single Court. However, Mr.Uma Shankar and Mr.S.Vasudevan, learned counsel for the appellants in some of the appeals would request that the First Appellate Court may pass separate judgments in the appeals and not dispose of all 10 appeals by a common judgment.3/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

6.Mr.Nandakumar, learned counsel for the appellants in the two appeals AS.Nos. 191 and 213 of 2024 would state that the subject matter of the appeals are not in any way connected or interlinked, though the suits came to be decided by the same judge (trial Court). He would further state that in the first appeals filed in AS.Nos. 191 and 213 of 2024, the defence raised by the defendant was entirely on a different footing. He would also state that the cross examination of the plaintiff's witness was on completely independent lines by the various counsel appearing for the defendants in the said 10 suits and therefore, he would state that there is absolutely no necessity to club all the appeals to be disposed of by a single court. 7.Mr.Nandakumar would further state that an application under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC has also been filed for adding additional evidence in the appeals and therefore, by clubbing all the appeals, it would only lead to unnecessary complications and likelihood of confusion for the learned First Appellate Court to advert to the specific objections of the appellants in the various appeals. 4/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

8.Per Contra, Mr.A.K.Sriram, learned senior counsel appearing for the first respondent / plaintiff would submit that though different counsel appeared for the defendants in all the 10 suits, the line of defense in all the suits was identical and in fact, cross examination was conducted by the same advocate in all the 10 suits. He would therefore state that when the pleadings are same, issues framed are identical, there can be no prejudice to any of the appellants in the 10 appeals, if the appeals are directed to be disposed of by a single court. 9.I have carefully considered the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties. 10.This Court under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure has ample powers to even suo motu transfer suits or appeals, if circumstances so warrant. In the present case on hand, the respondent / Temple, as owner of the properties, has sought for delivery of possession from the defendants and 10 independent suits were filed and all the 10 suits were tried before the same Court and in and by separate judgements, all the 10 suits came to be decreed in 5/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis favour of the respondent / Temple. All the defendants have filed independent appeals, challenging the judgment and decree of the trial Court. The said appeals have gone to different Courts. It is in respect of AS.No.182 of 2024 pending on the file of the XX Additional Court that the request for transfer has been made to this Court, for hearing the said appeal along with A.S.Nos.199, 120, 121 and 122 of 2024, which are all pending on the file of the I Additional City Court, Chennai. 11.It is at that juncture that the learned Senior Counsel, Mr.A.K.Sriram, appearing for the respondent/ plaintiff brought to my notice that there are other connected appeals which can also be clubbed and posted before a single Court / Judge.12.The objections of the appellants in AS.Nos.191 and 213 of 2024 appears to be only that the defence raised by the appellants in these appeals is distinct and not on the same lines of defence taken by the other appellants. It is therefore contended that if there is a joint disposal of all the appeals, the appellants in these two appeals may be seriously prejudiced as their independent and distinct defence raised before the trial Court may skip the 6/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis attention of the First Appellate Court. Apart from this, I do not find any other serious objection for transfer. 13.As rightly contended by Mr.C.Uma Shankar, it may not be desirable for the First Appellate Court to render a common judgment, since the suits were not tried jointly in the first place. However, at the same time, in order to save judicial time and avoid conflicting orders and multiplicity of proceedings, this Court certainly has powers to direct clubbing of the 10 appeals. While doing so, it is only required to protect the interest of the appellants, especially the appellants in AS.Nos.191 and 213 of 2024. It would be sufficient to direct the First Appellate Court to pass separate judgments in all the appeals, which would clearly address the apprehensions of the appellants in AS.Nos.191 and 213 of 2024. 14.In view of the above, I am inclined to allow the transfer CMP with the following directions:(i) The Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed. All the 10 appeals, viz., A.S.Nos.182, 199, 120, 121, 122, 112, 213, 179, 191 and 133 of 7/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2024 are suo motu transferred from their respective Courts to the file of the VII Additional City Civil Court, Chennai. (ii) Wherever applications under Order XLI Rule 27 CPC have been taken out, the said applications in the respective appeals shall be heard along with respective appeals.(iii) The transferee Court, namely the VII Additional City Civil Court, Chennai, shall hear the appeals and dispose of the same, after giving an opportunity to both sides to advance all their contentio'n and submissio'n, in and by separate judgment, including the applications, if any filed, under Order XLI Rule 27 CPC, along with the said appeals.(iv) The said appeal suits shall be disposed of on or before 31.03.2026.(v) There shall be no order as to costs. Connected Civil Miscellaneous Petition is closed..09.2025Speaking/Non-speaking orderIndex : Yes/Noata8/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis To1.The XX Additional City Civil Court, Chennai.2.The I Additional City Civil Court, Chennai.3.The VII Additional City Civil Court.9/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis P.B.BALAJI. J, ataPre-delivery order made inTr.CMP.No.991 of 2024& CMP.No.21709 of 2024.09.202510/10