Section 24 CPC Power Can Be Invoked By Common High Court For Two Or More States Even For Inter State Transfer Of Suits: Supreme Court
The Supreme Court held that the power under section 24 of the CPC can be exercised by the High Court even for inter-State transfer of a suit, appeal or other proceeding, if it is the common High Court for two or more States under Article 231 of the Constitution and both the Civil Courts (transferor and transferee) are subordinate to it.Section 25 CPC applies to inter-State transfer of a...
The Supreme Court held that the power under section 24 of the CPC can be exercised by the High Court even for inter-State transfer of a suit, appeal or other proceeding, if it is the common High Court for two or more States under Article 231 of the Constitution and both the Civil Courts (transferor and transferee) are subordinate to it.
Section 25 CPC applies to inter-State transfer of a suit, appeal or other proceeding where both States have a High Court in terms of Article 214 of the Constitution and not to a transfer where both States have a common High Court under Article 231 thereof, the bench of Justices Hrishikesh Roy and Dipankar Datta said.
In this case, the Gauhati High Court, (which is a common High Court for the States of Assam, Nagaland, Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh, presiding over the Bench at the principal seat at Guwahati) rejected an application seeking transfer of a suit from the court of District Judge at Dimapur, Nagaland to court of the District Judge at Guwahati, Assam.
The issues raised before the Apex Court in appeal were these:
(1) Is the Supreme Court the sole repository of power in terms of section 25 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for brevity ‘the CPC’) to direct transfer of a suit, appeal or other proceeding from a Civil Court in one State to a Civil Court in another State?
(2) Is it open for a High Court, if it is the common High Court for two or more States, to entertain an application for transfer under section 24 of the CPC and transfer a suit, appeal or other proceeding from a Civil Court to another Civil Court, both of which are subordinate to such High Court but situate in different States in relation to which it exercises jurisdiction, for consideration and decision?
To answer these issues, the bench referred to Section 24 and 25 of the CPC and made the following observations:
“access to justice” has to be real
"A narrow interpretation of section 25 imposing a bar for entertainment of an application under section 24 for transfer of a suit, appeal or other proceeding by a common High Court like the Gauhati High Court inter-se the four States in relation to which it exercises jurisdiction could place a heavy burden and might pose an insurmountable obstacle for litigants of the far-flung areas of the North-East, if they were made to approach this Court for such transfer on the specious ground that the Civil Court to which the same is proposed to be transferred is in a State other than the State in which the suit has been instituted. An interpretation of the law that seeks to address the mischief, that is consistent with the Constitution and promotes constitutional objectives and that which responds to the needs of the nation must be adopted. If “access to justice” has to be real, it becomes the moral responsibility of the Supreme Court, the supreme guardians/protectors of the rights of people guaranteed by the Constitution and the laws, not to construe the substantive part in section 25 of the Code in a pedantic manner to bring about a situation that would thwart the initiative of making “access to justice” real."
High Court ~ howsoever big or small, old or new ~ is as much a Constitutional Court as this Court
It is time all concerned realize that a High Court ~ howsoever big or small, old or new ~ is as much a Constitutional Court as this Court is and enjoys wide ranging powers vested in it by law. No doubt, the power under section 25 is a special power, but the common High Courts of the country ought not to read section 24 of the CPC in a manner as if the power of the Supreme Court under section 25 to order an inter-State transfer is available to be exclusively exercised by it in all cases of inter-State transfer, thereby denuding the common High Courts of the country of their jurisdiction by mere reference to involvement of an inter-State transfer and without anything more being looked at.
section 25 cannot operate as a bar for the Gauhati High Court
Section 25 would essentially have to be read as barring transfer of any suit, appeal or other proceeding from a Civil Court in one State to a Civil Court in another State if such States have their own High Courts but not in the case of a common High Court like the Gauhati High Court.
Allowing the appeal, the court answered the issues as follows:
(i) a true and proper interpretation of section 25 of the CPC leads us to the conclusion that the same applies to inter-State transfer of a suit, appeal or other proceeding where both States have a High Court in terms of Article 214 of the Constitution and not to a transfer where both States have a common High Court under Article 231 thereof; and(ii) the power under section 24 of the CPC can be exercised by the High Court even for inter-State transfer of a suit, appeal or other proceeding, if it is the common High Court for two or more States under Article 231 of the Constitution and both the Civil Courts (transferor and transferee) are subordinate to it.
Case details
Shah Newaz Khan vs State of Nagaland | 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 146 | CA 1497/2023 | 28 February 2023 | Justices Hrishikesh Roy and Dipankar Datta
For Appellant(s) Mr. Parthiv Goswami, Sr. Adv. Mr. Parthiv K. Goswami, Sr. Adv. Ms. Diksha Rai, AOR Ms. Ragini Pandey, Adv. Ms. Atiga Singh, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. K N Balgopal, Sr. Adv. Ms. K. Enatoli Sema, AOR Ms. Limayinla Jamir, Adv. Mr. Amit Kumar Singh, Adv. Ms. Chubalemla Chang, Adv. Mr. Prang Newmai, Adv. Mr. Vivek Narayan Sharma, AOR Ms. Mahima Bhardwaj, Adv. Ms. Laksha Bhavnani, Adv. Mr. Pranshu Kausha, Adv. Mr. Shubham Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Rajeev Kumar Jha, Adv. Mr. Ram Kumar, Adv.
Headnotes
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ; Section 24,25 - The power under section 24 of the CPC can be exercised by the High Court even for inter-State transfer of a suit, appeal or other proceeding, if it is the common High Court for two or more States under Article 231 of the Constitution and both the Civil Courts (transferor and transferee) are subordinate to it - Section 25 applies to inter-State transfer of a suit, appeal or other proceeding where both States have a High Court in terms of Article 214 of the Constitution and not to a transfer where both States have a common High Court under Article 231 thereof. (Para 48)
Interpretation of Statutes - An interpretation of the law that seeks to address the mischief, that is consistent with the Constitution and promotes constitutional objectives and that which responds to the needs of the nation must be adopted. (Para 46)
Interpretation of Statutes - A general law cannot defeat the provisions of a special law to the extent to which they are in conflict; else, an effort has to be made at reconciling the two provisions by homogenous reading. (Para 37)
Constitutional Court - A High Court ~ howsoever big or small, old or new ~ is as much a Constitutional Court as this Court is and enjoys wide ranging powers vested in it by law. (Para 42)