Section 24: General power of transfer and withdrawal

Code of Civil Procedure • Official Statutory Text & Practice Guide

Statutory Regulation
Legal Standard
Competent Court / Tribunal
Act 1908
Statutory Defined Terms in this Section: (Click any term for official legal definition)

Legal Commentary & Landmark Judgments: Section 24

Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 vests comprehensive supervisory and administrative jurisdiction in High Courts and District Courts to transfer, withdraw, or re-assign any suit, appeal, or civil proceeding at any stage of litigation.

  • Statutory Powers & Jurisdiction: The jurisdiction under Section 24 can be exercised either on the application of any litigant upon advance notice to all parties, or suo motu by the High Court or District Court without notice.
  • Sub-Section (1) Provision: Under sub-section (1), the court may transfer any proceeding pending before it to any competent subordinate court, or withdraw any proceeding pending in a subordinate court and either try it itself, transfer it to another competent subordinate court, or re-transfer it to the originating court.

Under sub-section (2), the transferee court may, subject to special directions, either retry the matter de novo or continue proceedings from the precise stage where transfer occurred.

Crucially, sub-section (5), introduced by the 1976 Amendment, clarifies that a suit or proceeding may be transferred under Section 24 from a court that has no territorial or pecuniary jurisdiction to try it. This statutory cure prevents the mandatory return of plaints under Order VII Rule 10, enabling supervisory courts to transfer improperly instituted actions directly to a competent forum, thereby preserving limitation and avoiding de novo filings. Sub-section (3)(b) expressly confirms that "proceeding" includes execution proceedings under Order XXI.

Key Landmark Precedents:
  • Kulwinder Kaur v. Kandi Friends Education Trust, (2008) 3 SCC 659: The Supreme Court established illustrative grounds for transfer under Section 24, including reasonable apprehension of bias, convenience of witnesses, balance of convenience, avoidance of multiplicity of proceedings, and public confidence in the fairness of the judicial process.
  • Nahar Industrial Enterprises Ltd. v. Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Corp., (2009) 8 SCC 646: The Supreme Court held that the power under Section 24 can be exercised only between civil courts governed by the Code; a civil suit cannot be transferred under Section 24 to a specialized statutory tribunal such as a Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT).
Legal Commentary:

Litigants seeking transfer under Section 24 must establish cogent and objective grounds; bald allegations of judicial bias are viewed with strict disapproval and may attract exemplary costs. In practice, Section 24 is frequently deployed for the consolidation of cross-suits or connected property litigations pending across different courts to prevent conflicting decrees on identical facts.