SYED HAMID ALI SHAH, J.--- The petitioners moved an application for the transfer of case pending in the Court of Mr. Ahmad lqbal Mian, Civil Judge, Jhelum, which was dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge, vide order dated 18.6.2008, impugned herein.
2. It is contended by learned counsel that learned Court has disclosed its mind while deciding application for secondary evidence. It was also contended that the petitioner has seen the respondent (Jibrael) in the company of his counsel, visiting learned Judge in his chamber. It waslastly contended that conduct of learned Court is prejudicial to the petitioner.
3. Learned Sessions Judge, while passing the impugned order has observed that order of dismissal of application for permission to adduce additional evidence, can be assailed in higher forum and is hardly a ground for transfer of the case. The learned Judge who has expressed his opinion has been held not a good ground for the transfer of the case. Reference in this regard can be made to the cases of Eastern Federal Union Insurance Company Limited v. Central Board of Revenue, Government of Pakistan, Islamabad through Member Taxation and another (PLJ 1983 Karachi 328) and Aminuddin and 4 others v. Salima Bano (1996 CLC 1361). Similarly, it has been held in the case of Azad Government and others v. Genuine Rights Commission and others (1999 M LD 160) that a Judge who has passed an adverse order against the party, gives no valid cause for the transfer of the case.
4. It has rightly been held by learned Court without specific mention of date and time of the visit of counsel and the party to the chamber of learned Judge is hardly a ground for transfer of the case. Moreso, when these allegations are rebutted in a counter-affidavit.
5.. For the foregoing, this petition has no merit and is accordingly dismissed in limine. .