Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

A. Anandan and Others Vs. Gurunathan died Represented by Gnanam and Others

A. Anandan and Others vs Gurunathan died Represented by Gnanam and Others

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Jan 11, 2017
~4 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1186070

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Chennai High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
Tr.C.M.P. Nos. 697 & 698 of 2016
Subject
Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue
Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

A. Anandan and Others

Respondent

Gurunathan died Represented by Gnanam and Others

Excerpt

.....local jurisdiction where the fourth respondent is practicing as an advocate. 6. the said allegations are opposed by the learned counsel for the respondents. 7. the allegation of the petitioners in the transfer civil miscellaneous petitions is that one of the respondents is an advocate practicing in poonamallee and therefore he will be more influential in the local court, is unfounded and cannot be restrained. any advocate is free to carry on his profession any where in india. therefore, the apprehension of the petitioners, is unsustainable. in fact, the petitioners themselves have filed the other suit o.s.no.284 of 2015 only on the file of the sub court, poonamallee based on the territorial jurisdiction. only one suit is filed before the city civil court, which is for the relief of injunction for the reasons best known to them. the learned counsel for the petitioners also pointed out that the f.i.rs are being filed against the respondents. 8. considering the arguments advanced on both sides, this court is of the view that all the three suits may be transferred to a court outside the tiruvallur district. learned counsel appearing for the respondents also has got no serious objection for the same. 9. accordingly, o.s.no.1 of 2011 and o.s.no.284 of 2015 pending on the file of the sub court, poonamallee and o.s.no.7072 of 2014 pending on the file of the xiv assistant city civil court, chennai are withdrawn and transferred to be tried on the file of the sub court, kancheepuram. the parties are at liberty to adduce evidence in any one of the suits as may be directed by the sub court, kancheepuram. 10. with the above said observations, the tr.c.m.ps are disposed of. no costs.

Full Judgment

(Prayer: Petitions filed under Section 24 of the Civil Proceedure Code praying to withdraw the suit in O.S.No.1 of 2011 and O.S.No.284 of 2015 respectively from the file of the Sub Court, Poonamallee, Tiruvallur District and transfer the same to the City Civil Court at Chennai for hearing the same along with the suit O.S.Nos.7072 of 2014 on the file of the XIV Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai.)

Commonorder:

1. There are two Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petitions. O.S.No.1 of 2011 is filed on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Poonamallee seeking relief of partition and separate possession. O.S.No.7072 of 2014 is filed by the respondents in the previous suit as plaintiffs on the file of the XIV Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai for the relief of damages and permanent injunction. The same parties had filed O.S.No.284 of 2015 on the file of the Sub Court, Poonamallee for declaration that the deed of relinquishment dated 06.02.2012 is null and void and for other reliefs.

2. O.S.No.1 of 2011 and O.S.No.284 of 2015 are pending before the Sub Court, Poonamallee and other suit in O.S.No.7072 of 2014 is pending before the XIV Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai.

3. Now, the petitioners in the above Tr.C.M.Ps have sought for transfer of O.S.No.1 of 2011 and O.S.No.284 of 2015 pending on the file of the Sub Court, Poonamallee to be transferred to the XIV Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai to be tried along with O.S.No.7072 of 2014 pending on the file of the XIV Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai.

4. Heard both sides.

5. The only reason argued by the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the fourth respondent is an Advocate practicing in Poonamallee, who has influence to divert normal process of the Court and indulged in illegal activities earlier. Therefore, the petitioners have had no hope of getting fair justice in the Court of local jurisdiction where the fourth respondent is practicing as an Advocate.

6. The said allegations are opposed by the learned counsel for the respondents.

7. The allegation of the petitioners in the transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petitions is that one of the respondents is an Advocate practicing in Poonamallee and therefore he will be more influential in the local Court, is unfounded and cannot be restrained. Any Advocate is free to carry on his profession any where in India. Therefore, the apprehension of the petitioners, is unsustainable. In fact, the petitioners themselves have filed the other suit O.S.No.284 of 2015 only on the file of the Sub Court, Poonamallee based on the territorial jurisdiction. Only one suit is filed before the City Civil Court, which is for the relief of injunction for the reasons best known to them. The learned counsel for the petitioners also pointed out that the F.I.Rs are being filed against the respondents.

8. Considering the arguments advanced on both sides, this Court is of the view that all the three suits may be transferred to a Court outside the Tiruvallur District. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents also has got no serious objection for the same.

9. Accordingly, O.S.No.1 of 2011 and O.S.No.284 of 2015 pending on the file of the Sub Court, Poonamallee and O.S.No.7072 of 2014 pending on the file of the XIV Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai are withdrawn and transferred to be tried on the file of the Sub Court, Kancheepuram. The parties are at liberty to adduce evidence in any one of the suits as may be directed by the Sub Court, Kancheepuram.

10. With the above said observations, the Tr.C.M.Ps are disposed of. No costs.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial