Skip to content


Sakharam and anr. Vs. Gangaram and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtMumbai
Decided On
Judge
Reported in(1889)ILR13Bom654
AppellantSakharam and anr.
RespondentGangaram and ors.
Excerpt:
civil procedure code (act xiv of 1882), section 25 - district court-no power to transfer suits pending in its own court--ultra vires--construction--practice. - section 31(4) (since repealed) :[tarun chatterjee & h.l.dattu, jj] jurisdiction of high court - respondent, a government company, chartered appellants vessel to carry rock phosphate from togo to west coast india - dispute arose between parties - under agreement, respondent had chosen mumbai as port of delivery vessel carrying rock phosphate was delivered at port of bombay - application filed by respondent earlier before delhi high court for appointment of certain individual as arbitrator had become infructuous because of his demise held, high court of bombay, is not correct in rejecting arbitration petition filed by appellant on.....charles sargent, c.j.1. the suits, having, been transferred from the court of the subordinate judge of pandharpur to the district court of sholapur, were pending in the latter court when the defendants made their application to have the suits retransferred to pandharpur. section 25 only enables a district court to transfer a suit pending in a court of first instance subordinate to itself, and not to transfer a suit which is pending in its own court. the order of retransfer must, therefore, be discharged as having been made without jurisdiction. rule made absolute with costs.
Judgment:

Charles Sargent, C.J.

1. The suits, having, been transferred from the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Pandharpur to the District Court of Sholapur, were pending in the latter Court when the defendants made their application to have the suits retransferred to Pandharpur. Section 25 only enables a District Court to transfer a suit pending in a Court of first instance subordinate to itself, and not to transfer a suit which is pending in its own Court. The order of retransfer must, therefore, be discharged as having been made without jurisdiction. Rule made absolute with costs.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //