Telangana High Court
M/S. Vidya Dayini Educational Society, ... vs Sri. D. Pramod Singh on 12 August, 2025
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY
TRANSFER CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.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.Afzul Purkar, learned counsel for
petitioners and Sri A.Sanjay, learned counsel for respondent.
3. The brief facts of the case, shorn-off unnecessary details,
required for adjudication of this Tr.C.M.P., as averred in the
affidavit filed in support 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; that their
parents acquired several properties during their lifetime and they
also formed a society by name 'Vidya Dayini Educational Society'
with registered office in premises bearing No.8A, Old Santosh
Nagar Colony, Near Saidabad, Hyderabad; that their mother
expired on 15.07.2007 and their father passed away on 07.07.2020;
that the above property is a joint family property; that differences
LNA, J
arose between the brothers with regard to management of the
properties; and that a suit in OS.No.200 of 2020 is filed 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 and 462/2014, dated 17.04.2014,
executed by their father in favour 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 before the 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
properties in OS.No.210 of 2023 is subject matter of suit-
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
Tr.C.M.P. is filed.
LNA, J
4. Learned counsel for petitioners submitted that the suit filed
by petitioners in OS.No.200 of 2020 is a comprehensive suit which
also includes the property mentioned in OS.No.210 of 2023,
however, the respondent, despite having knowledge that a
comprehensive suit is filed by petitioners and the same is pending,
has filed OS.No.210 of 2023. He further submitted that 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 same 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 another 1, wherein a learned single
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
6. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent submitted that the
property, which is subject matter of OS.No.210 of 2023 is situated
at Saroornagar, which is within the territorial jurisdiction of Ranga
Reddy Court, therefore, the respondent filed the suit before the
Court having jurisdiction to adjudicate 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.No.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, arrears of rent and mesne
profits in respect of one of the joint family properties. Admittedly,
respondent filed suit-OS.No.210 of 2023 three years after filing of
LNA, J
the suit by petitioners. The only contention raised by respondent is
that the property which is subject matter of OS.No.210 of 2023 is
situated within the territorial jurisdiction of Ranga Reddy Court,
therefore, the said suit cannot be transferred.
8. It is pertinent to mention that one of the properties in
OS.No.210 of 2023 is subject matter of OS.No.200 of 2020 and as
rightly pointed out by learned counsel for petitioners, there is every
possibility of passing conflicting judgments if the said suits are
tried and disposed of by different Courts, which unnecessarily
would lead to multiplicity of litigation.
9. In G.V.Prasanna's case (cited supra), the learned single
Judge reiterating the observations made by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in Kulwinder Kaur @ Kulwinder Gurcharan Singh Vs.
Kandi Friends Education Trust and others 2 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.
(2008) 3 SCC 659
LNA, J
10. The said judgment is squarely applicable to the present case,
since the subject matter of OS.No.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
Kulwinder Kaur @ Kulwinder Gurcharan 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 transferred 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 date of receipt of a copy of this order.
LNA, J
14. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand
closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
_____________________________
LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY, J
Date:12.08.2025
dr
