13 January 1997
Supreme Court
Download

SHIV KUMARI DEVENDRA OJHA Vs RAMAJOR SHITLA PRASAD OJHA

Bench: K. RAMASWAMY,G.T. NANAVATI
Case number: T.P.(C) No.-000281-000281 / 1996
Diary number: 73173 / 1996
Advocates: Vs R. D. UPADHYAY


1

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2  

PETITIONER: SHIV KUMARI DEVANNDRA OJHA

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: RAMAJOR SHITLA PRASAD OJHA & ORS.

DATE OF JUDGMENT:       13/01/1997

BENCH: K. RAMASWAMY, G.T. NANAVATI

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT:                          O R D E R      The petitioner  has filed this petition for transfer of proceedings, viz.,  Succession Application  No. 43/95  along with Misc.  Application  No.  23/96  titled  Ramajor  Shitla Prasad Ojha & Ors. vs. Shiv Kumari Devandra Ojha, pending in the Court  of Civil  Judge, Senior Division, Valsad, Gujarat to the  competent court  of Civil  Judge at  Sadar  District Pratapgarh in  Uttar Pradesh. We had adjourned the matter by our Order  dated December  9, 1996  to find  out whether the suit was  still pending or stood disposed of. It is reported that the matter is still pending and the Civil Judge, Senior Division is  yet to  take up the matter. Learned counsel for the Petitioner  has stated  that the Petitioner being a lady is unable  to travel from Uttar Pradesh to Valsad in Gujarat and it  is a  really a  great difficulty for her to meet the expenditure in  that behalf.  Shri Upadhyay, learned counsel appearing for  the  respondents  has  agreed  top  bear  the expenditure for  her travel  and stay  whenever she  attends court. Under the circumstances, we do not find that there is any justification for transferring the matter to Pratapgarh, U.P.  Whenever   the  petitioner  goes  to  the  Court,  the respondents would  pay Rs.  750/- (Rupees  seven hundred and fifty only)  on each  occasion to  the  petitioner  and  the amount would be paid to her in advance. The petitioner would intimate the  Civil Judge,  Senior Division who would direct the respondents to pay the amount to the petitioner.      It is  next contended that the petitioner had to engage her counsel  from Surat since no advocate would be available at Valsad  where the  suit is  pending. We  think  that  the apprehension  of   the  petitioner   is  not   correct.  The petitioner is at liberty to engage counsel at Valsad and the counsel would  give his  best to the petitioner in defending her  case.   If  the   petitioner  requires   any  financial assistance from  the respondents, it would be open to her to file an  application in  the Court  of Civil  Judge,  Senior Division, Valsad  for this  purpose and  the same  would  be ordered by  the Civil Judge. Learned Civil Judge is directed to dispose  of the  application for  restoration immediately and would simultaneously take up the main matter and dispose of the same expeditiously.

2

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2  

    The transfer petition is accordingly disposed of.