Court : Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
Case No : Tr.CMP(MD) No. 173 of 2026 & CMP(MD) No. 3901 of 2026
Judges: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K. MURALI SHANKAR
Parties : Karur District Sagaja Nalvazhvu Sangam represented by its President Anoor Village, Aravakuruchi Taluk & Karur & Others
Appearing Advocates : For the Petitioner: P.R. Balasubramanian, Advocate. For the Respondent: R1 & R2, A. Mohamed Haneef, R7, R8, R12, R13, R15, R17, R18, R24, R25, R28, R29, R31, R33 to R36, R38,R39, R41, R42, R44, R45, R50, R52, R53, R54, R55, R60, R62, R63, R70, R71, R73, R76, R77, R77 R81, R85, R86 , R87, R89, R92, R 93, R94, R100, to 109, R107, R108, Sundara Moorthy, R3 to R6, R9 to R11, R14, R16, R22, R23, R30, R34, R40, R43, R46 to R48, R51, R56, R57, R64 to R66, R68, R69, R72, R74, R75, R82 to R84, R90S, Manju Bargavi, R19 to R21, R26, R27, R37, R49, R58, R59, R61, R67, R78, R80, R88, R91, R95, R96, and R97, R98, R99, R108, No Appearance.
Date of Judgment : 07-08-2026
Head Note :-
Civil Procedure Code - Section 24 -
Judgment :-
(Prayer iForn Tr.CMP(MD)No.173 of 2026: This Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure praying to withdraw the suit in O.S.No.118 of 2018 pending on the file of District Court, Karur and transfer the same to any other District Court in any District other than Karur District.
1. The Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition has been filed seeking orders to withdraw the suit in O.S.No.118 of 2018 pending on the file of District Court, Karur and transfer the same to any other District Court in any District other than Karur District.
2. The respondents 1 and 2/plaintiffs have filed a suit suit against as many as 117 defendants, including the present petitioners, seeking declaration that the suit properties belonging to the plaintiffs' temples (idols) and for consequential permanent injunction restraining the defendants, their men and agents from in any manner interfering with the plaintiffs' peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit property, except in respect of those portions where temporary structures are stated to have been put up. The plaintiffs have also sought recovery of possession of such portion after removal of the temporary structures allegedly put up by the defendants by way of trespass, constructions, creation of encumbrances or otherwise.
3. When the transfer petition came up for admission this Court, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and taking note of the serious nature of the allegations levelled, granted an order of interim stay and also directed the Registry to call for a report from the learned District Judge, Karur and also to secure the CCTV footage of the Court proceedings recorded during the working hours on 07.03.2026 from the District Court, Karur.
4. In pursuance of the directions of this Court, the learned District Judge, Karur submitted his remarks and also enclosed the CCTV footage for the entire day. When the matter was taken up for final hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the Officer against whom certain allegations were levelled in the affidavit filed in support of the transfer petition, has already been transferred and the officer has already been relieved from the office of the Principal District Court, Karur and in view of the subsequent developments, the grievance canvassed by the petitioners no longer survives, and the very basis for seeking transfer has ceased to exist. Consequently, this Court has no other option, but to hold that the Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition has become infructuous and is liable to be dismissed.
5. When the matter was taken up for final hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned counsel appearing for some of the respondents would submit that appropriate observations are to be made so as to enable them to file applications before the trial Court for examining certain Government Officials as witnesses and for receiving additional written statements.
6. The learned counsel for the respondents 1 and 2/plaintiffs would contend that such observations may prejudice their rights; that the applications filed by the other side seeking impleadment of certain parties have already been dismissed, and the Civil Revision Petitions challenging the said order are pending before this Court and that as many as 81 witnesses have already been examined and that about 40 more witnesses are proposed to be examined.
7. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to express any opinion on the merits of the rival submissions or on the maintainability or otherwise of any application that may be filed by either of the parties before the learned Trial Judge, as any such observation may prejudice the rights and contentions of the parties.
8. It is for the learned trial Judge to consider every application, as and when filed, independently, strictly in accordance with law and on its own merits, after affording an opportunity of hearing to all the parties concerned, uninfluenced by the observations made in this order. Since the Transfer Civil 11 Miscellaneous Petition itself has become infructuous, the learned trial Judge is at liberty to proceed with the trial and dispose of the suit as expeditiously as possible, in accordance with law.
9. In the result, the Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is dismissed as infructuous. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
