Transfer of Cases under CPC (Sections 22–25)
Introduction
As a general rule, in civil litigation the plaintiff is dominus litis (master of the suit) and enjoys the right to choose the forum where the suit will be instituted, provided that multiple courts have jurisdiction. Normally, this choice is respected and not interfered with. However, to balance fairness, the CPC (Sections 22–25) empowers defendants, High Courts, and the Supreme Court to transfer cases in appropriate circumstances. These provisions are exhaustive and act as safeguards to ensure fair trial, convenience, and justice.
Section 22 & 23: Transfer on Defendant’s Application
Who Can Apply?
• Only the defendant (not the plaintiff).
When Can Defendant Apply?
• Where the plaintiff had a choice of filing in two or more courts, but chose one.
• The defendant may seek transfer to another competent court.
Conditions:
1. Defendant must give notice to plaintiff and other parties (mandatory).
2. Application must be filed at the earliest stage, before settlement of issues.
3. The court must hear objections before deciding.
Where to File Transfer Application? (Sec. 23)
1. If both courts are subordinate to the same appellate court → Application lies to that Appellate Court (District Judge).
2. If courts are under different appellate courts but same High Court → Application lies to the High Court.
3. If courts are under different High Courts (different States) → Application lies to the High Court within whose jurisdiction the suit was filed.
Section 24: General Power of High Court & District Court
Who Can Apply?
• Any party (plaintiff/defendant), OR
• The Court suo motu (on its own).
When?
• At any stage of the case.
Powers of High Court/District Court under Section 24:
1. Transfer a case from one subordinate court to another.
2. Withdraw a case from a subordinate court and:
• Try it themselves, or
• Send it to another subordinate court, or
• Re-transfer to the original court.
Scope of Section 24:
• Applies to any suit, appeal, or proceeding, including execution cases.
• Can transfer cases even from a court without jurisdiction.
• If a Small Causes Court case is transferred, the transferee court will act as a Small Causes Court.
Case Law:
• Durgesh Sharma v. Jayshree (2008 SC) → High Court cannot transfer a case to a court not subordinate to it.
Section 25: Power of Supreme Court to Transfer
Who Can Apply?
• Any party to the case.
Scope:
• Supreme Court can transfer any suit, appeal, or proceeding from one High Court/civil court in one State to another High Court/civil court in another State.
• Grounds: Expedient in the interest of justice (fair trial, convenience, avoiding conflicting judgments).
Process:
• Formal application + supporting affidavit must be filed before the Supreme Court.
Effect of Transfer:
• The new court may:
1. Start the case afresh, or
2. Continue from the stage left by previous court (as directed by SC).
Case Law:
• Shakuntala Modi v. Om Prakash Bharoka (1991 SC) → Husband filed divorce in Bombay, wife filed maintenance in Guwahati. SC transferred the divorce case to Guwahati for convenience and to avoid conflicting decisions.
Judicial Principles on Transfer of Cases
Balancing Interests:
1. Plaintiff’s Right → To choose the forum.
2. Defendant’s Right → To fair and impartial trial.
Courts must carefully balance both and transfer cases only when truly necessary.
Key Supreme Court Observations & Case Laws
1. Arvee Industries v. Ratan Lal (1977 SC)
• Plaintiff’s choice should not be disturbed lightly.
• Burden of proof lies on party seeking transfer.
2. Maneka Gandhi v. Rani Jethmalani (1979 SC)
• Famous principle: “Fair trial is the paramount consideration.”
• Transfer only when justice is genuinely threatened (bias, safety threats, public hostility).
3. T.V. Eachara Warrier v. State of Kerala (1985)
• Mere inconvenience, vague allegations, or delay in filing transfer → Not enough.
4. Indian Overseas Bank v. Chemical Construction Co. (1979 SC)
• Court considers balance of convenience (for parties, witnesses, and smooth trial).
• “Forum conveniens” principle applied.
5. Subramaniam Swamy v. Ramakrishna Hegde (1990 SC)
• Even if the transferee court lacks territorial jurisdiction, case can be transferred if justice requires.
6. Kulwinder Kaur v. Kandi Friends Education Trust (2008 SC)
• Court must avoid discussing merits while transferring.
• Reasons must be recorded.
✓ Grounds for Transfer of Suits
Sufficient Grounds
1. To avoid multiplicity of proceedings/conflicting judgments (Indian Overseas Bank case).
2. Reasonable apprehension of bias or unfair trial (Gujarat Electricity Board v. Atmaram Poshani, 1989).
3. Common questions of law/fact in related suits.
4. Balance of convenience for parties/witnesses (Arvee Industries).
5. To avoid delay/unnecessary expenses (Shiv Kumari v. Ramajor Shitla Prasad, 1997).
6. To prevent abuse of court process (Maneka Gandhi case).
7. Cases involving important questions of law/public interest.
Insufficient Grounds
1. Mere personal inconvenience (Indian Overseas Bank).
2. Vague fear of unfair trial without evidence (Maneka Gandhi).
3. Long distance of court (Manohar Lal v. Seth Hiralal, 1962).
4. Opponent being influential (Subramaniam Swamy case).
5. Presiding judge’s community/religion (Gaja Dhar Prasad v. Sohan Lal).
6. Judge’s past decision in similar case (Krishan Kanahya v. Vijay Kumar).
7. Adverse remarks by judge or prejudice against pleader (not affecting party).
Landmark Case: Gujarat Electricity Board v. Atmaram Sungomal Poshani (1989 SC)
Facts:
• Employee (Atmaram) filed a suit in Bombay against disciplinary proceedings by Gujarat Electricity Board.
• Cause of action arose in Gujarat.
Issue:
• Could Bombay court hear the case? Was there valid apprehension of bias in Gujarat?
Decision:
• SC transferred case to Gujarat.
Principles Laid Down:
1. “Justice must not only be done but must also seem to be done.”
2. Balance of convenience favoured Gujarat (place of cause of action).
3. Mere allegation of bias not enough.
Conclusion
Sections 22–25 CPC ensure that transfer of cases is possible only when necessary for justice, while protecting the plaintiff’s dominus litis right. Courts exercise this power cautiously, balancing plaintiff’s forum choice and defendant’s fair trial right.
• Sections 22 & 23 → Defendant’s right to seek transfer between competent courts.
• Section 24 → High Court/District Court’s general power to transfer/withdraw cases.
• Section 25 → Supreme Court’s wide power to transfer cases across States, in the interest of justice.
Thus, the law on transfer of cases prevents harassment, forum-shopping, and miscarriage of justice, ensuring fairness and convenience in civil proceedings.
✓ To start your preparation for Judicial Services Examination at home, drop a message on WhatsApp +91 8840961324 or call us on +91 9151591324
At Theory of Abrogation, we equip you with everything you need:
•Subject-wise expert classes
•Mock test series
•Legal current affairs
•Personalized mentorship for interview preparation“Your law degree is your foundation, but your preparation is what will build your success.”
Join Our New Batch Now!
Prepare smart. Prepare with Theory of Abrogation.
Contact Us:
B-109, Commercial
Complex Dr. Mukherjee
Nagar, Delhi-09
+91 9971399324 | +91 8840961324
[email protected]