Mere Apprehension and Unsubstantiated Allegations Against Presiding Officer Insufficient for Transfer, Rules Court
The Telangana High Court has dismissed a Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition filed by petitioner B. Narsimha Reddy seeking the transfer of a civil suit, O.S. No. 31 of 2019, from the file of the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Medchal Malkajgiri District. Justice Renuka Yara, while delivering the order on February 3, 2026, emphasized that mere apprehensions of an adverse order and unsubstantiated allegations against the presiding officer do not constitute valid grounds for the transfer of a case.
The petitioner, represented by Advocate D. Amarender Reddy, argued that he had concerns about not receiving a fair trial due to alleged influence over the Presiding Officer by one of the respondents, who purportedly boasted about this influence within the Bar Association. The petitioner also presented a photograph to support the claim, showing the Presiding Officer in a public gathering attended by the respondent.
However, the court pointed out that the presence of the Presiding Officer at public events does not inherently indicate bias and that such gatherings cannot be controlled in terms of attendance. Moreover, the court highlighted the necessity of explicit and verified reasons for transferring a suit, as vague apprehensions and claims without evidence are insufficient.
Additionally, the court noted that the subject matter of the suit did not pertain to the property related to the construction of the District Court complex, further weakening the petitioner's claims. The court also dismissed arguments concerning the amendment of the prayer in the suit, clarifying that potential changes in pecuniary jurisdiction due to amendments are distinct from claims of bias affecting a fair trial.
Ultimately, the court concluded that the reasons presented by the petitioner, both documented and orally submitted, lacked the substance required to warrant a transfer. The petition was dismissed, and the court reiterated the importance of substantiating claims with valid evidence when seeking such reliefs.
The decision underscores the judiciary's commitment to maintaining procedural integrity and ensuring that transfers are not granted on speculative grounds, thereby safeguarding the impartiality of the judicial process.
Bottom Line:
Transfer of suit - Mere apprehension of adverse order or false claims made by a party in the Bar Association cannot be a ground for transfer of the suit.
Statutory provision(s): Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Section 24
B. Narsimha Reddy v. Commissioner, (Telangana) : Law Finder Doc id # 2851141
