BATOOL BIBI and others vs GHULAM QADIR
This matter arises from a petition for leave to appeal directed against the order of the Lahore High Court dismissing a transfer application filed by the petitioners to transfer a civil suit from the Court of Civil Judge, Vehari, back to the Court of Civil Judge, Mailsi. The core legal question concerns whether a suit competently transferred due to the personal reasons of a former judge must be re-transferred merely because that judge is no longer posted at the original station. The Supreme Court held that since no bias or prejudice was attributed to the present incumbent at Vehari and given that the distance between the two stations is only about fifty miles, there was no ground to interfere with the High Court's order. The Court laid down the principle that the transfer of a suit will not be reversed or re-transferred solely upon the change of a judicial officer at the original station in the absence of substantiated bias or prejudice against the presiding officer of the court currently seized of the matter.
- Whether a suit transferred from one court to another due to the personal reasons of a judge must be re-transferred upon the transfer of that judge?
- Does the mere change of a judicial officer at the original station constitute sufficient ground for the re-transfer of a civil suit?
ORDER
' AJMAL MIAN, J.---This is a petition for leave to appeal against the order dated 11-5-1993 passed by a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court in Transfer Application No,102-C of 1992 filed by the petitioners for the transfer of a suit from the Court of Civil Judge, Vehari, to the Court of Civil Judge, Mailsi, on the ground that the suit property is situated there, dismissing the same. The petitioners have, therefore, filed the present petition for leave to appeal.
2. In support of the above petition, Mr. Muhammad Iqbal, learned Advocate Supreme Court appearing for the petitioner, has contended that since originally the suit was filed in the Court of Civil Judge, Mailsi, and as the same was transferred to the Court of Civil Judge, Vehari, for the reason that the then incumbent of the office of Civil Judge, Mailsi, did not want to hear the above suit for personal reasons, the aforesaid suit should have been re-transferred as the said incumbent, who declined to hear the suit, was no longer posted at Mailsi.
3. The above suit was competently transferred from one Court to another. The High Court has declined to re-transfer the same for the reason that no bias or prejudice has been attributed to the present incumbent of the office of Civil Judge, Vehari. We do not find it a fit case for grant of leave as, according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the distance between Mailsi and Vehari is about 50 miles. Leave is, accordingly, refused. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.