MATARVA Vs. AMRI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application of Matarva, appellant, for transfer of his appeal pending in the court of the Additional Commissioner, Alwar to some other court. The grounds given in his application are that the learned Additional Commissioner ordered for summoning the file of the lower court but when the files were not received he ordered for decision of the case without sending for the files. This showed that the Additional Commissioner had become prejudiced against the applicant and so the case may be transferred from his court.

(2.) A report was called for from the Additional Commissioner. He says that he had ordered for summoning the files of the lower court but when they had not been received and the counsel for the respondent urged that he had to come from Bharatpur on every hearing and had been put to much expense and as it was a second appeal the arguments would be confined to law points only and the arguments would not be heard on the basis of the file of the lower appellate court. The Vakil for the appellant wanted to see the original adoption deed which the respondent had with him and produced it for the perusal of the Vakil for the appellant. Inspite of this the Vakil for the appellant refused to argue the case till the files of the lower court were received. The Additional Commissioner did not think necessary that the files of the lower court should be obtained, the arguments of the Vakil for the respondents were heard and the case fixed for judgment.

(3.) I do not see why the Vakil for the appellant should have declined to argue the case on the points upon which he wanted his appeal to be accepted. If he could show during the course of the argument that the decision of the appeal could not be given unless the files of the lower court were available the Additional Commissioner would have considered the request. But without showing how it was essential to have the files of the lower court the Vakil for the appellant should not have refused to argue the case. If he did so the Additional Commissioner did not show any prejudice in proceedings to decide the appeal. Although it would have been better for the satisfaction of the parties if he had obtained the files from the lower court and if the lower court had been negligent they should have been taken to task for not complying with his orders. I do not think it would have made any difference to the decision of the case if the files had been available but it would have satisfied the. appellant. Therefore, it would be advisable in such cases to make it appear that justice was being done.