HELEN ROY CHOWDHURY Vs. BAMA CHARAN MUKHERJEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner filed an application under Section 10 of the City Civil Court Act, 1953 ('Act' for short) for transfer of Title Suit No.1183 of 1985, in which she is the plaintiff, from the learned Judge, Third Bench, City Civil Court, Calcutta to some other learned Judge of that Court on the such apprehension were detailed in the application. After hearing the parties the learned Chief Judge, of the City Civil Court rejected the application, without going into its merits, on a finding that power under Section 10 of the Act could be exercised by him only to ensure proper distribution of business or to give effect to the provisions of Section 11 of the Act, and it did not extend to grounds canvassed by the petitioner. Aggrieved thereby the petitioner has filed his application intituling it at as one under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure and 227 of the Constitution of India.

(2.) In the context of the above facts the only point that falls for determination in the application is what is the nature and extent of the power of the Chief Judge of the City Civil Court under Section 10 of the Act. Considering the importance of the point involved we requested Mr. Shyama Prasanna Roy Chowdhury, the learned Advocate, to appear as amicus curiae. We place on record our deep appreciation for the assitance rendered by him in deciding the point.

(3.) To relieve the Original Side of this Court of part of the large volume of civil litigation arising in the City of Calcutta and to ensure speedy administration of justice the Act was brought in the Statute Book and the City Civil Court was established the rounder. To preside over The City Civil Court a Chief Judge and other Judges have been appointed under Section 4 of the Act and the extent of their jurisdiction has been delineated in Section 5 thereof. Section 10 of the Act speaks about the power of the Chief Justice in respect of distribution of business, and transfer and withdrawal of suits or proceedings.