HAZARI NAND Vs. BAL KRISHAN RAWAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition is maintained by the petitioner/defendant under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, against the impugned order dated 7.12.2018 passed by learned District Judge, Shimla, H.P., whereby the learned District Judge, Shimla has transferred the case No. 132-1 of 2012/243/1 of 2012/13 from the Court of Civil Judge, Court No. 6, Shimla, to the Court of learned Civil Judge, Jubbal.

(2.) As per the petitioner,/defendant the respondent/plaintiff maintained a suit for recovery against the petitioner/defendant before the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Div.) Shimla, HP . The suit was for recovery on the ground that plaintiff/respondent used to give advance to apple growers at his own risk. It has further been alleged in the plaint that plaintiff/respondent gave advance to the petitioner/defendant, when he approached the plaintiff/respondent in his office at Sarsvati Nagar in Tehsil Jubbal as advance, but the defendant/petitioner has not sent apple boxes. Hence, the present petition. The suit is pending adjudication and the plaintiff/respondent is resident of Vill. Khauni, PO Sarsvati Nagar, Tehsil Jubbal, District Shimla, H.P. and the petitioner/defendant was resident of Tikkar (Diswani) PO Kaloti, Sub Tehsil Chirgaon, District Shimla. As per learned counsel for the parties, learned District Judge, Shimla has transferred the case from the Court of learned Civil Judge, Court No. 6, Shimla to the Court of learned Civil Judge, Jubbal.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner/defendant has argued that the case is required to be heard at Shimla as the petitioner/defendant is resident of Chirgaon, District Shimla.