Allahabad HC: Section 24 CPC Prevents Conflicting Decrees in Related Adoption Suits

The Allahabad High Court has reinforced the equitable nature of Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, ruling that subsequent suits involving substantially identical issues must be transferred to the court where the earlier proceeding is pending to prevent the risk of inconsistent decrees and ensure judicial economy. This decision clarifies that the power of transfer is not merely a matter of party convenience but a vital tool for the orderly administration of justice.

In a recent judgment, Hon'ble Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava, J. allowed a transfer application, shifting a suit for cancellation of an adoption deed from Kannauj to Kanpur Nagar, where a declaratory suit regarding the same deed was already under adjudication.

Consolidation of Identical Controversies

The High Court emphasized that when two suits arise from the same transaction in this case, a registered adoption deed dated 30.06.2022 it is imperative they are heard by the same forum. The applicants had initially filed a suit in Kanpur Nagar seeking a declaration that the adoption deed was valid, while the respondents later filed a suit in Kannauj seeking its cancellation. The Court noted that since the foundational issue and the evidence required in both suits substantially overlap, separate proceedings would lead to a duplication of effort and the potential for conflicting judicial outcomes.

Court's Rationale on Section 24 CPC

The Court, in its reasoning, observed: "The jurisdiction under Section 24 Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 is equitable in nature and is to be exercised whenever the exigencies of justice so require. The provision is not confined to cases where hardship or inconvenience alone is established; it equally enables the Court to regulate the course of judicial proceedings in a manner that secures an effective, efficient and comprehensive adjudication of the controversy. The ultimate touchstone is whether the proposed transfer would better serve the administration of justice."

Furthermore, the Court clarified that even though the opposite parties expressed a 'no objection' to the transfer, the court's discretion cannot rest on consent alone and must be independently satisfied that the transfer advances the ends of justice.

Directions Issued to Trial Courts

The Court has following directions:

"(i) O.S. No. 170 of 2023 (Vishnu Kant Tripathi and another Vs. Apurva Shukla and another), pending before the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), Kannauj, is hereby withdrawn from the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), Kannauj and transferred to the Court of the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Kanpur Nagar, having jurisdiction to try the same.

(ii) The Civil Judge (Junior Division), Kannauj shall transmit the entire original record of the aforesaid suit to the transferee Court within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

(iii) Upon receipt of the record, the transferee Court shall proceed with the suit from the stage at which it stands transferred and shall, subject to the provisions of law and after hearing the parties, consider the desirability of hearing O.S. No. 170 of 2023 along with O.S. No. 2465 of 2022, or of adopting such other procedure as may be permissible in law, so as to secure an effective adjudication of the disputes and avoid inconsistent decrees."

Background:

The dispute originated from a registered adoption deed executed on June 30, 2022, regarding a minor girl child. The applicants (Preeti Mishra and another) claimed the child had settled in their family, but subsequent pressure from the biological parents (respondents) led the applicants to file a suit in Kanpur Nagar for a declaration of the deed's validity. Shortly after, the respondents filed a separate suit in Kannauj seeking the cancellation of the same deed. The applicants then moved the High Court seeking the transfer of the Kannauj suit to Kanpur Nagar. The High Court, noting the identity of the parties and the commonality of the issues, allowed the transfer to ensure a comprehensive adjudication and avoid inconsistent decrees.

Case Details:
Case No.: TRANSFER APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 900 of 2023
Case Title: Preeti Mishra and another Versus Vishnu Kant Tripathi and another
Appearances:
For the Petitioner(s): Arvind Srivastava, Mohd. Naushad Siddiqui
For the Respondent(s): Rajeev Tiwari

Source: 2026 CaseBase(ALL) 579