JUDGMENT Vivek Singh Thakur, J. - This petition has been preferred against impugned order dated 29th January, 2020 passed by learned District Judge, Hamirpur in Transfer Application Registration No. 2 of 2020, titled Amar Nath vs. Krishni Devi and others, whereby application, preferred by petitioner under Section 24 CPC for transfer of his case titled Amar Nath vs. Krishni Devi and others (Reg. No. 1810/2019 Filing No. 2530) from Civil Judge, Court No.3, to any other Court, has been dismissed. 2. Plea taken by petitioner for transferring the case is that Presiding Officer of the trial Court is not neutral but biased and is annoyed with petitioner and therefore, petitioner has strong reason to suspect that petitioner would not get justice from the said Presiding Officer. The reason for apprehension of petitioner, as also reflected in impugned order, is also for that on one date, learned counsel representing the petitioner was not present in the Court and then petitioner was asked to argue the matter and was threatened that adverse order would be passed against him. 3. As evident from impugned order, after receiving the application seeking transfer of case pending before Court No.3 Hamirpur, learned District Judge has called the comments of Presiding Officer and in response thereto Presiding Officer of the trial Court has denied the fact that he was annoyed with petitioner and further that petitioner had appeared before him in person as his Advocate was out of station and on that day, his prayer was considered and allowed and adjournment was granted. 4. It has also been observed by learned District Judge that learned counsel representing the petitioner had also withdrawn his Power of Attorney in view of the fact that application for transfer was filed by petitioner without taking him into confidence. 5. Learned District Judge has rightly observed that there are no specific allegations against Presiding Officer for feeling annoyed with petitioner, rather, Presiding Officer had adjourned the case on request of petitioner when his counsel was not available. As observed by learned District Judge, transfer of case from one Court to another Court without any justifiable reason will definitely cause doubt upon the competency and integrity of Judge from whom the case is sought to be transferred. As observed by learned District Judge, transfer of case from one Court to another Court without any justifiable reason will definitely cause doubt upon the competency and integrity of Judge from whom the case is sought to be transferred. Mere presumptions and possible apprehensions without basis are not sufficient for transferring the case from one Court to another Court and such transfer of case must be based on reasonable, rational and sufficient substantial ground. A case cannot be transferred simply because the petitioner feels that transfer would be in his interest. There is nothing on record to substantiate the apprehension of the petitioner. 6. In view of above discussion, I find no plausible and justifiable reason for accepting the prayer of petitioner to transfer the case from Court No.3 to another Court. 7. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed with observation that the trial Court shall adjudicate the matter in accordance with law without being influenced by observations of this Court as well as the fact that petitioner has filed application before learned District Judge and has approached this Court as justice not only be done but also seems to have been done and Courts are established for delivering justice. Always it must be remembered that faith of common citizen, particularly litigant citizen, in Judicial System is real strength of the Courts and every Court is under obligation to act accordingly to maintain it.