2025 PLP 630 (MLD)

Ali Baig, C.J.

Under section 24, C.P.C., the petitioners have moved the instant petition for transfer of Reference Petition No.101/2016 (10/2015) titled "Jumla Malikan-e-Botokhail and others v. Ibadat Shah" from the Court of learned Referee Judge District Diamer to any other Court of competent jurisdiction.

2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner submitted that the petitioners have lost confidence in the learned trial Court as the learned trial Judge has already dismissed a similar nature case of the petitioners. The learned counsel for the petitioners further argued that the learned trial Judge has family terms with the contesting respondents, hence, the petitioners have lost confidence in the learned trial Judge. The learned counsel for the petitioners further argued that if the reference petition of the petitioners is not transferred, then the petitioners would suffer irreparable loss. In support of his arguments, the learned counsel for the petitioners has relied upon reported judgment of superior Court reported as 2012 MLD 501.

3. Conversely, the learned counsel for the contesting respondents i.e. (Malikan-e-Botokhail) controverted the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioners by contending that the learned trial Judge has no relation with the contesting respondents. The learned counsel for the contesting respondents further contended that almost forty reference petitions for and against the contesting respondents are pending adjudication before the learned trial Jugde and if this petition is allowed on the basis of relationship of the trial Judge with the contesting respondents and the case of the petitioners is transferred, then it will be a precedent for other litigants of reference petitions and they will also approach this Court for transfer of their cases/petitions. The learned counsel for the contesting respondents further contended that the learned trial Judge is fair and unbiased Judge, hence, the contentions of the learned counsel for the petitioners are baseless, as such the instant transfer petition is not meritless and the same is liable to be dismissed. In support of his arguments, the learned counsel for the contesting respondents has relied upon reported judgment of superior Court reported as 2009 YLR 950.

4. I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the available record with their able assistance.

5. Perusal of the contents of the transfer petition filed under section 24, C.P.C. by the petitioners transpires that the transfer petition has been filed by the petitioners on the following two grounds:-

1. The learned referee Judge, Diamer has close relations with the contesting respondent No.1, therefore, petitioners have lost confidence in the Referee Judge, District Diamer.

2. Another similar nature reference petition bearing No.102/ 2016 Jumala Malikan-e-Batokhail v. Muhammad Naseer and others was subjudiced before the learned Referee Judge, Diamer and the learned trial Cour/Judge has dismissed the aforesaid reference petition, therefore, the petitioners have lost confidence in the Referee Judge Mr. Suhail Ahmad Khan.

6. During course of arguments the learned counsel for the petitioners has not been able to establish that the learned Referee Judge has any close relations with the respondents No.1 (Malikan-e-Botokhail) as the learned Referee Judge belongs to Gilgit and is a Pathan by caste.He has nothing to do with the respondents No.1.

7. As far as the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that the learned Referee Judge District Diamer has decided similar nature reference petition against some of the petitioners is concerned, I am of the opinion that case/reference petition cannot be transferred on the ground that since the learned Referee/District Judge District Diamer while deciding similar nature matter has already expressed an adverse opinion or passed decision against some of the petitioners, therefore, the other case of similar nature might would be the same fate. I do not see any logic behind the aforementioned apprehension for simple reason that every case has its own facts and circumstances and the learned trial Court decide the matter on merits on the basis of the evidence, as such, the apprehension of the petitioners under the circumstances is misconceived and not tenable in law.

8. In view of herein above facts, I am of the considered view that petitioners have not mentioned any reasonable ground for transfer of case from the learned Trial Court/ Referee Court Diamer to any other Court of competent jurisdiction. Accordingly, the instant petition filed under section 24, C.P.C. being devoid of merit is hereby dismissed. No order as to costs. File MQ/3/GB Petition dismissed.