The Delhi High Court recently rejected a request to move ongoing cases from the Family Judge at Patiala House Courts to another court with suitable jurisdiction. The court emphasized that such requests should be based on reasonable concerns rather than solely on hypersensitivity.

“While there is absolutely no doubt in the legal proposition that Justice must not only be done, but also appear to be done, and where a party has a reasonable doubt that such a party may not get justice in a particular Court, the same may be a ground to transfer the proceedings to another Court, at the same time, such apprehension must be founded on reason and should not be merely of an over sensitive mind.”

Justice Navin Chawla dismissed the plea, which claimed the basis on certain remarks supposedly made by the Family Court during hearings. The dismissal was attributed to the petitioner's inconsistent approach in pursuing the proceedings before the Family Court.

Importantly, the petitioner's counsel argued that the remarks made by the concerned judge had created a perception in the petitioner's mind that justice might not be served in the said court. The contention was that regardless of whether this apprehension was well-founded in facts, once expressed, the court should consider transferring the matter.

On the contrary, the respondents' counsel argued that the petitioner was intentionally prolonging the proceedings in the Family Court and that any claim of apprehension was unfounded. The court referenced the Supreme Court's ruling in R. Balakrishna Pillai v. State of Kerala, noting that a mere assertion of apprehension about the fairness of justice was insufficient. Such apprehensions must seem reasonable, genuine, and justifiable to the court.

Justice Chawla noted that the petitions seemed to be yet another tactic by the petitioner to prolong the resolution of the proceedings in the Family Court. Consequently, finding no valid grounds to transfer the cases to a different court, the petitions were dismissed.

Advocates Basab Sengupta & Nandini Sen appeared for petitioner
Advocate Gauri Gupta appeared for respondents

Case Title: Upinder Kaur Malhotra v. Capt Teghjeet Singh Malhotra and Anr,