KHAN MUHAMMAD And Others vs ISHTIAQ HUSSAIN
This petition for special leave to appeal arose from a pre-emption suit valued at Rs. 1,60,000, initially decreed by a Civil Judge. At the time of the decree, appeals for suits of this value lay with the High Court. However, during the pendency of the appeal, Act V of 1986 amended the Punjab Civil Courts Ordinance, increasing the appellate jurisdiction of District Judges to Rs. 2,00,000. Consequently, the High Court transferred the appeal to the District Judge, Bahawalnagar, invoking its powers under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908. The petitioners challenged this transfer, arguing they possessed a vested right to have their appeal heard by the High Court and that the amendment was not retrospective. The Supreme Court rejected these contentions, affirming that Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 expressly empowers the High Court to transfer pending appeals to competent subordinate courts. The Court held that litigants have no vested right to a specific forum for appeal that overrides the High Court's statutory power of transfer.
- Does a litigant have a vested right to have an appeal heard by a specific forum?
- Does the High Court have the power to transfer a pending appeal to a subordinate court under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908?
- Can the High Court transfer an appeal to a subordinate court without notice to the parties?
- Section 24, Code of Civil Procedure 1908
- Act V of 1986
- Punjab Civil Courts Ordinance
ORDER
SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.--In this petition for special leave appeal the respondent filed a suit for preemption. The value of the suit for the purpose of jurisdiction was Rs.1,60,000/-. The suit w; decreed by the trial Court on 3-12-1984. On this date an appeal fro a decree of a Civil Judge lay before the District Judge if the value of the original suit did not exceed Rs.50,9000/-. Accordingly, the petitioners lodged their appeal in the High Court. While this appeal was pending Act V of 1986 came unto force. This Act amended Punjab Civil Courts Ordinance by raising the appellate jurisdiction the District Judges upto an amount of Rs.2,00,000/-. Thereupon the High Court by an order presumably made under section 24 of the Civil Procedure Code transferred the petitioner's appeal to the District Judge, Bahawalnagar for disposal. The, petitioners moved an application before the High Court for the re-transfer of the appeal to its off file. This application was dismissed bow a learned Single Judge. The petitioners seek leave to appeal from the order of the learned Sing Judge.
2. In support of this petition two contentions have been raised namely,
(1) the petitioners have a vested right to have their appeal hear and decided by the High Court, and
(2) the amendment made by Act V f 1986 in the Punjab Civil Courts Ordinance is not retrospective.
3. We find little merit in either of these two contentions. The were considered and rejected by this Court in Bashir v. Wazir A (1987 SCM R 978). Apart from that, Section 24 of the Civil Procedure Code expressly empowers the High Courts of its own motion without notice to the parties to transfer any appeal pending before it is disposal to any Court subordinate to it a d competent to dispose the same. It is not disputed that at the time when the High Coin made the order of transfer the District Judge at Bahawalnagar was competent to dispose of the petitioners' appeal. The petitioners cannot claim a vested right in derogation of this statutory power of the High Court. We would accordingly dismiss this petition.