TR CMP(MD)/532/2025 of Saranya Vs Pandiyan on 29 October 2026

ORDER

This petition is filed by the petitioner U/s.24 of CPC seeking for an order to withdraw the case in O.S.No.89 of 2020 pending on the file of the Sub Court, Pattukottai and to transfer the same to the Principal District Court, Pudukottai to try along with O.S.No.69 of 2021.

2. The affidavit in brief: The petitioner was a tenant under the respondents 1 and 2 and running a gold pawn broker shop in the shops belonged to them. The respondents 1 and 2 were running a jewellery shop. Upon business transactions with the respondents 1 and 2, the petitioner has given signed unfilled concur sheets, stamp papers and unfilled cheques to the respondents. Using the unfilled documents, the respondents 1 and 2 have filed a suit in O.S.No.89 of 2020 before the Sub Court, Pattukottai against the petitioner for recovery of alleged money. The same respondents 1 and 2 instigating the brother of the 2nd respondent one Kumar filed another suit in O.S.No.69 of 2021 before the Principal District Court, Pudukottai for recovery of RS.27,06,667/- from the petitioner. In these circumstances, the petitioner has filed this petition seeking transfer of the suit from the Sub Court, Pattukottai to the Principal District Court, Pudukottai.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the respondents 1 and 2 have filed a suit in O.S.No.89 of 2020 on the file of the Sub Court, Pattukottai for recovery of money based on unfilled documents against the petitioner and the respondents 3 and 4. The petitioner is the 3rd defendant in that suit. One Kumar, the brother of the 2nd respondent and the cousin of the 1st respondent, was induced by the respondents 1 and 2 to file another suit by utilising the unfilled documents given by the petitioner. The said Kumar has filed another suit in O.S.No.69 of 2021 before the Principal District Court, Pudukottai against the petitioner. Both suits are pending and connected with same matter. Both suits are pending for trial. Hence, the petitioner has filed his petition seeking for transfer the case from the Sub Court, Pattukottai to the Principal District Court, Pudukottai to try along with O.S.No.69 of 2021.

4. The learned counsel for the respondents 1 and 2 submitted that the suits are not connected with each other and the cause of action in both suits is entirely different, so the petition may be dismissed.

5. On hearing from both sides, it is clear that the respondents 1 and 2 have filed a suit in O.S.No.89 of 2020 on the file of the sub Court, Pattukottai

against 1.Malarkodi, 2.Kamalasundari and 3.Saranya (petitioner herein) for recovery of Rs.7,35,000/- along with interest at 12% on Rs.5,88,000/- on the allegation that the petitioner and other defendants borrowed 23 sovereign gold jewels from the respondents on 15.06.2018 for marriage of the 2nd defendant Kamalasundari and also executed pronote for the same on 15.06.2018 itself. It is further clear that one Kumar has filed a suit in O.S.No.69 of 2021 on the file of the Principal District Court, Pudukottai against the petitioner alone as sole defendant for recovery of Rs.27,06,667/- with interest on the basis of pronote dated 05.04.2018 executed by the petitioner. The said Kumar has specifically pleaded in his plaint that the petitioner has executed the promissory note in his house situate at Pudukottai.

6. A mere reading of plaint averments in both suits it is clear that the cause of action mentioned in both suits are entirely different. It is also pertinent to note here that the plaintiff in O.S.No.69 of 2021 namely Kumar was not added as party in this petition. Based on the averments and cause of action arose in different stations, the suits came to be filed before the concerned jurisdictional Court. Moreover, the parties are not one and the same in both suits. The plaintiffs are different in both suits. The plaintiff has right to choose a Forum to file a suit based on his averments. The petitioner alone is a

defendant i.e. 3rd defendant in O.S.No.89 of 2020 and the sole defendant in O.S.No.69 of 2021. There is no valid reason for transferring the suit from the Sub Court, Pattukottai to the file of the Principal District Court, Pudukottai. Therefore, considering the above facts and circumstances, this Court is not inclined to transfer the suit as sought by the petitioner.

7. In the result, this Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected Civil Miscellaneous Petition is closed. 29.10.2026 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No

Internet : Yes / No VSD To

1. The Sub Court, Pattukottai

2. The Section Officer, Vernacular Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

P.VADAMALAI, J. VSD

Pre - Delivery Order made in Tr.CMP(MD)No.532 of 2025 and C.M.P(MD)No.14476 of 2025 29.10.2026