JUDGMENT Hon'ble Abhinava Upadhya, J. By means of this writ petition the petitioner has challenged the order of the District Judge, Jalaun at Orai dated 15.7.2014, by which the application of the petitioner under Section 24 of C.P.C. for transferring the case from one court to another has been rejected. 2. A suit being suit No. 221 of 2003 was filed by the plaintiffs/respondents for prohibitory injunction and delivery of possession against the petitioner. In the said suit written statement etc. were filed and evidence was taken and concluded and the case was listed for pronouncement of judgment. At this stage an application was filed for bringing on record certain tender receipts, by which it was claimed that the defendant/petitioner deposited the rent in the court. The court below refused to entertain the application holding that at this stage it is merely a dilatory tactics. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the court ought to have either accept the application or reject the same. Merely refused to accept the application shows bias of the court, therefore, the petitioner has lost faith in the same court and the case may be transferred to another court, for which an application has been moved by the petitioner which has been rejected. 4. The District Judge while rejecting the application under Section 24 of C.P.C. has held that when the case was listed for final disposal at that stage the application having been filed was motivated and on this ground it is not appropriate to hold that the court was biased against the defendant/ petitioner. 5. I have considered the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the order of the learned District Judge rejecting the application of the petitioner. 6. I am of the view that there is no error in the order impugned which may merit any further consideration by this Court. The writ petition is misconceived and it is, according, dismissed.