| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1963 SLG 3452 = 1963 SLD 3452 = 1963 PLD 781 |
Sindh High Court
Civil Transfer Application No. 512 of 1962, decided on 23rd April 1963.
Presented By: Wahiduddin Ahmad and A. S. Faruqui, JJ
A. S. Pirzada for Applicant. S. Zamirul Haq for Opponents. Dates of hearing : 8th and 16th April 1963.
Civil Transfer Application No. 512 of 1962, decided on 23rd April 1963.
Presented By: Wahiduddin Ahmad and A. S. Faruqui, JJ
A. S. Pirzada for Applicant. S. Zamirul Haq for Opponents. Dates of hearing : 8th and 16th April 1963.
ABDUL GHAFOOR-Applicant
VERSUS
Moulvi ABDUR RAHIM AND OTHERS-Opponents
Law:
Section:
Bias-Allegation against Civil Judge that he had been won over by other party-Denied by Civil Judge in his report submitted to High Court on application for transfer of case-Civil Judge while submitting report asking for action being taken against applicant "in fairness to me and to uphold dignity of Court" Civil Judge's request no indication of bias-Transfer application rejected-Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S. 24. The plaintiff, in a suit for restitution of conjugal rights, took the following ground (among others) in his application to the High Court for transfer of the case under section 24, Civil Procedure Code, 1908 "That the defendants are very influential persons and I have been informed that they have won over the learned Judge so much so that they have announced their victory in the bradary and distributed sweets amongst their relations and friends." The Civil Judge concerned, in his report called for by the High Court, observed "The allegation of the plaintiff that the defendants had won me over to their side, is both false and malicious. I emphatically deny the truth of this allegation and request that the plaintiff should be called upon to prove it. In case of his failure to do so, appropriate legal action should kindly be taken against him in fairness to me and to uphold the dignity of this Court." It was argued by the plaintiff's counsel that in so far as the Civil Judge had expressed himself strongly and had suggested action to be taken against the plaintiff for making those allega tions, an inference of bias in relation to the case must be made and the case transferred. Held that this could not be made a ground for transfer. To do this might result in demoralising the subordinate judiciary and encouraging cantankerous and unscrupulous litigants in adopting a similar course. The allegations having been found not to be true, the ground of making these allegations and the resultant remarks of the Court cannot be the reason for the transfer of the case. To do so might tend to bring the Court into disrepute. Such a ground cannot be countenanced. A party…