ORDER 1. THE PETITIONER SEEKS TRANSFER OF SUIT NO. 102 OF 2003, SADANAND BUNDELA (DR.) V. RAM DHAR GUPTA PENDING BEFORE THE COURT OF SUB-JUDGE, FIRST CLASS, JOGINDERNAGAR, DISTRICT MANDI (H.P.) TO AN APPROPRIATE COURT AT ETAWAH, U.P. 2. THE RESPONDENT HAS FILED A SUIT FOR RELEASE OF PREMISES UNDER SECTION 21(A) OF THE U.P. URBAN BUILDINGS (REGULATION OF LETTING, RENT AND EVICTION) ACT, 1972 BEFORE THE COURT OF PRESCRIBED AUTHORITY, ETAWAH. THE SAID SUIT IS BEING CONTESTED BY THE PETITIONER TENANT HEREIN. IN THOSE PROCEEDINGS, THE PETITIONER HAD FILED AN AFFIDAVIT TO THE RESPONDENT DATED 14-11-2002. IN BRIEF, THE CASE OF THE RESPONDENT SEEKING EVICTION OF PREMISES AT ETAWAH IS THAT AFTER RETIREMENT FROM GOVERNMENT SERVICE, HE IS TO SETTLE AT ETAWAH, A PLACE TO WHICH HE BELONGS, AND NEEDS THE PREMISES FOR HIS OWN OCCUPATION. THE SUIT OF WHICH TRANSFER IS SOUGHT HAS BEEN FILED BY THE RESPONDENT AGAINST THE PETITIONER IN THE COURT AT JOGINDERNAGAR, MANDI, HIMACHAL PRADESH SEEKING A DECLARATION THAT THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 14-11-2002 IS FALSE AND THE PETITIONER TENANT BE RESTRAINED FROM USING THE SAID AFFIDAVIT IN PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE PRESCRIBED AUTHORITY. THE AFFIDAVIT HAS BEEN FILED IN PROCEEDINGS FOR RELEASE OF PREMISES AT ETAWAH. THE PREMISES ARE AT ETAWAH AND THE RESPONDENT WISHES TO A SETTLE AT ETAWAH. THE QUESTION WHETHER THE AFFIDAVIT IS FALSE OR NOT MAY ALSO HAVE TO BE GONE INTO IN THE EVICTION PROCEEDINGS. 3. HAVING REGARD TO THE FACTS, AS ABOVE-NOTICED, WE FEEL IT WOULD BE EXPEDIENT IF THE SUIT (NO. 102 OF 2003) FILED IN HIMACHAL PRADESH IS TRANSFERRED AND TRIED AT AN APPROPRIATE COURT AT ETAWAH. IT IS ORDERED ACCORDINGLY. THE SUIT, ON TRANSFER, WILL BE PLACED BEFORE THE LEARNED DISTRICT JUDGE, ETAWAH, D.P. WHO SHALL EITHER TRY THE CASE HIMSELF OR ASSIGN IT TO AN APPROPRIATE COURT. 4. THE TRANSFER PETITION IS DISPOSED OF ACCORDINGLY. 5. NO ORDER AS TO COSTS.