MAHADEVI SHOLINGANALLUR Vs. AMUDHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS transfer petition has been filed under Sec. 2, C. P. C to withdraw O. S. No. 133 of 2005 from the file of District Munsif Court , Alandur and to transfer the same to any other competent Court.

(2.) THE Transfer Petition arises under the following circumstances: THE disputed property relates to 5732 sq. ft. in S. No. 70 situate at Gandhi Street , Sholinganallur Village , Tambaram Taluk. One raghupathy has filed O. S. No. 553 of 2004 against the third respondent claiming that he is the owner of the property. In the said suit, the said Raghupathy has also obtained an order of Interim Injunction in I. A. No. 1336 of 2004. According to the petitioner, the third respondent has nothing to do with the suit property and the suit has been deliberately filed against the third respondent without arraying the real owner. It is alleged that by obtaining an order of Interim injunction against the third respondent, Raghupathy has attempted to interfere with the petitioner's possession and enjoyment. THE petitioner has filed o. S. No. 975 of 2004 before District Munsif Court , alandur for permanent injunction. THE said suit is pending. In the said suit, though the petitioner sought for injunction, no order of injunction is said to have been granted.

(3.) COUNTERING the arguments, learned counsel -for the first respondent has submitted that the grounds alleged in the Transfer petition cannot be the reason for ordering transfer. Contend­ing that if the petitioner is really aggrieved over the order of Interim Injunction, I earned coun­sel for the first respondent has submitted that the petitioner ought to have either moved the Appellate Court or the same Court for vacat­ing the order of Injunction and seeking transfer of case is not justified. In support of his contention, learned counsel relied upon the de­cision reported in A. Venkatasubbiah Naidu v. S. Challappan and others, (2001) 1 M. L. J 75 (S. C.): (2000) 4 CTC 358.