ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR

Civil Transfer App. No. S – 19 of 2019

Date of hearing

Order with signature of Judge

Hearing of case

For hearing of main case

22.11.2019

Mr. Shoukat Ali Makwal, Advocate for the applicant.

Mr. Mehboob Ali Wassan, Assistant Advocate General Sindh.

.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-

Applicant Jaiseena Khan is present in the Court, seeks transfer of Family Suit No.39/2019 pending before learned Family Judge-I, Gambat for “Maintenance and Dowry articles”. Transfer application is moved mainly on the ground that attitude of the Presiding Officer is very harsh. Notice was issued to Mst. Bilqees Khatoon. Comments were called from the learned Family Judge, in which allegations have been denied. It is stated in the comments that on 05.10.2019, applicant filed an application for DNA test of the minor; it was dismissed on 15.10.2019 and then the matter was adjourned for recording of the evidence. On 31.10.2019, neither the applicant nor his counsel were present, however, Mst. Bilqees Khatoon was present along with the counsel and learned Family Judge recorded examination-in-chief of the plaintiff / respondent, but cross-examination was reserved due to absence of Jaiseena Khan. Presiding Officer has denied the allegations and stated that frequent adjournment applications are moved by applicant Jaiseena Khan, to prolong Family Suit.

2. Heard Mr. Shoukat Ali, counsel for applicant and Mr. Mehboob Ali Wassan, Assistant Advocate General Sindh and perused the relevant record.

3. Transfer of a case from one Court to another indirectly casts doubt on the competence and integrity of the Judge from whom the case is sought to be transferred. Mere presumptions or possible apprehension are not sufficient. Only good and sufficient grounds clearly set out in transfer application may justify the transfer of the case. The law is well settled that a litigant cannot choose a Judge / Court of his choice. In the present Transfer Application, there is allegation against Presiding Officer of harsh attitude. Alleged impropriety attributed to the Judge having been duly explained in the comments.

4. In my considered view, allegation of harsh attitude against the Presiding Officer has not been substantiated by cogent material. No instance has been quoted that on which date, harsh words were used by the Presiding Officer, even otherwise Judicial Officer cannot be expected to use harsh language with the litigants. Allegations appear to be without any substance. Transfer Application is dismissed.

J U D G E

Abdul Basit