ORDER : The petitioners have filed this Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition under Section 24 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (for short ‘CPC’) with a prayer to set aside the orders dated 23.11.2021 in Tr.OP No.2 of 2021 on the file of the learned Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad and to pass such other orders, as this Court deems fit and proper. 2. Notice served on the respondents. Heard learned counsel on both sides. Perused the material available on record. The submissions made on either side have received due consideration of this Court. 3. The petitioners, who are the respondents in Tr.OP No.2 of 2020 before the learned Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, have filed this application under Section 24 of CPC assailing the docket orders dated 23.11.2021 wherein and whereunder the learned Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad has allowed Tr.OP No.2 of 2021 with an observation that the parties to the suits and subject matter are the same, though the reliefs sought are different being rival parties, the outcome in one suit will have a direct bearing on the other suit, as both are interconnected, hence to avoid multiplication of evidence and pronouncement of conflicting decisions, it is necessary that both the suits be tried by one court either jointly or separately. As a result, OS No.908 of 2019 pending on the file of the learned X Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad was withdrawn and transferred the same to the Special Judge for trial of Commercial Disputes, Hyderabad, to be tried along with COS No.37 of 2019 pending on the file of that Court. 4. The respondents in Tr.OP No.2 of 2021, who are the plaintiffs in COS No.37 of 2019 and defendants in OS No.908 of 2019 on the file of the learned X Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, have filed this Tr.CMP assailing the said orders on the following grounds: i) that the suit in COS No.37 of 2019 is filed on the file of the Special Judge, Commercial Court claiming for damages and perpetual injunction. ii) that the Commercial Court is a Special Court constituted under the provisions of Commercial Courts Act, 2015, whereas, the respondents herein have filed OS No.908 of 2009 before the learned X Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, for recovery of possession, arrears of rents and mesne profits, which is not a commercial dispute. iii) that the learned Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad has no jurisdiction to withdraw OS No.908 of 2019 from the file of X Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad and to transfer the same to the Special Court constituted under the provisions of Commercial Courts Act. iv) that the Commercial Court is not a subordinate Court to the Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad and the learned Chief Judge, City Civil Court has erroneously exercised the powers under Section 24 of CPC. 5. The respondents have not filed counter. However, the learned counsel for the respondents strenuously contends that Section 24 of CPC deals with the general power of transfer and withdrawal and for the purpose of this section, all the Courts in the Unit are subordinate to the Court of Principal District Judge or the Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad and in that view of the matter, the learned Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad is justified in withdrawing OS No.908 of 2019 from the file of X Additional Chief Judge and rightly made over the said matter to the Special Judge for trial of Commercial Disputes and there are no grounds to interfere with the order impugned, prayed for dismissal of the transfer petition. 6. In the light of rival contentions and material available on record, the following points would emerge for consideration: i) Whether the Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad/Principal District Judge is competent to withdraw and transfer to any Court subordinate to it pending on the file of the Additional District Judge to the file of another Additional District Judge? ii) Whether the Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad has got jurisdiction to transfer the original suit to the Special Court in the cadre of District Judge for trial and disposal of Commercial Disputes at Hyderabad? Point No.(i): 7 (i). Section 24 of CPC deals with general power of transfer and withdrawal. ii) Whether the Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad has got jurisdiction to transfer the original suit to the Special Court in the cadre of District Judge for trial and disposal of Commercial Disputes at Hyderabad? Point No.(i): 7 (i). Section 24 of CPC deals with general power of transfer and withdrawal. Under Section 24 of CPC the High Court or the District Court may at any stage of suit or appeal pending in any court subordinate to it order for withdrawal of such suit or appeal and to dispose of the same by the High Court or the Principal District Court or to transfer the same to any court subordinate to it and competent to try and dispose of the same. 7(ii). Section 2 (4) of CPC defines the ‘District’ means the local limits of the jurisdiction of a Principal Civil Court of original juisdiction (hereinafter referred to as a ‘District Court’) and includes the local limits of ordinary original civil jurisdiction of High Court. 7(iii). Section 3 of CPC deals with Subordination of Courts for the purposes of the Code, the District Court is subordinate to the High Court, and every Civil Court of a grade inferior to that of a District Court and every Court of Small Causes is subordinate to the High Court and District Court. 7(iv). Section 4 (1) of CPC is a saving provision which says that in the absence of any specific provision to the contrary, nothing in this Code, shall be deemed to limit or otherwise affect any special or local law now in force or any special jurisdiction or power conferred, or any special form of procedure prescribed, by or under any other law for the time being in force. 8. Thus, a plain and conjoint reading of Section 24 of CPC, Section 2 (4), Section 3 and Section 4 (1) of CPC together with relevant provisions of the Telangana Civil Courts Act, 1972 makes it abundantly clear that the Principal District Judge or the Chief Judge, City Civil Court which is defined under Section 2 (4) as “District Court” is competent to withdraw a suit, appeal or other proceedings pending on the file of one Additional District Judge and to transfer the same to the other Additional District Judge within the Unit. The District Court is a single, even though there are Principal District Judge and Additional District Judges and all of them form part of Principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction and any decision rendered by any of them in the same as that of from the Principal District Judge. 9. In this context, I may also refer to the decision of a Division Bench of this Court in Tadikonda Surya Venkata Satyanarayana Murthy v. Tammana Seethamahalakshmi and others, 2016 (5) ALD 482 (DB) wherein while dealing with a reference it was answered that as per Section 2 (4) of CPC, ‘District’ means local limits of the jurisdiction of the Principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction. Therefore, the expression ‘District Court’ also denotes a principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction of a District and all other civil Courts of original jurisdiction even if presided over by the officers of the very same rank and status will not be treated as District Courts and they do not happen to the Principal Civil Court of the District. Thus, the Principal District Judge has power to withdraw a suit or appeal or other proceeding pending on the file of one Additional District Judge and transfer to the other Additional District Judge. Therefore, the point is no more res integra and it was resolved way back in the year 2016 by a Division Bench of erstwhile High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad for the State of Andhra Pradesh and for the State of Telangana. 10. From the above, it is clear that the Principal District Judge/Chief Judge, City Civil Court is competent not only to make over and assign work to the Additional District Judges but also has the power to withdraw or made over or reassign to any another Additional District Court by transfer. The Principal District Judge of the Principal District Court can do transfer from Additional District Judge to another Additional District Judge of the same District Court. Here, District Court is one though District Judges including the Principal District Judge or more than one. The word ‘Principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction’ used in Section 2 (e) of CPC reference to the Court and not to the Judge. The point is accordingly answered. Point No.(ii): 11. Here, District Court is one though District Judges including the Principal District Judge or more than one. The word ‘Principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction’ used in Section 2 (e) of CPC reference to the Court and not to the Judge. The point is accordingly answered. Point No.(ii): 11. Here in the instant case, the learned Chief Judge, City Civil Court at Hyderabad, as per the orders in Tr.OP No.2 of 2009, dated 23.11.2021, ordered for withdrawal and transfer of OS No.908 of 2019 pending on the file of the learned X Additional Chief Judge and transferred the same to the Special Court for trial of Commercial Disputes to be tried along with COS No.37 of 2019 with an observation that though the reliefs sought are different, since the parties to the suit and the subject matter are the same, to avoid multiplication of evidence and pronouncement of conflicting decisions, it is just and necessary that both the Courts to be tried by one Court either jointly or separately. 12. Be it stated that Special Court for trial of Commercial Disputes is established under Commercial Courts Act, 2015 at Hyderabad. There is Principal Special Court and Additional Special Court in the cadre of District Judge for trial and disposal of Commercial Disputes at Hyderabad having territorial jurisdiction over Hyderabad Revenue District and one Commercial Court is established in Ranga Reddy District at L.B. Nagar having territorial jurisdiction over rest of the Telangana State. It may be noted that no jurisdiction is conferred either on the Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad or on any of the Principal District Judge under Commercial Courts Act, 2015. The Commercial Courts Act, 2015 deals with the jurisdiction of the Special Judge in respect of commercial disputes and that Court is not subordinate to the Chief Judge, City Civil Court for withdrawal and transfer or making over any matters from one of the Additional Chief Judges Court to that Court. It is not a regular civil Court whereunder the learned Principal District Judge or the Chief Judge, City Civil Court is competent to withdraw and transfer certain matters either to or from the Special Court under Commercial Courts Act, 2015. 13. It is not a regular civil Court whereunder the learned Principal District Judge or the Chief Judge, City Civil Court is competent to withdraw and transfer certain matters either to or from the Special Court under Commercial Courts Act, 2015. 13. Section 15 of Commercial Courts Act, 2015 deals with transfer of pending cases and Section 16 of Commercial Courts Act, 2015 deals with Amendment to Civil Procedure Code in its application to the commercial disputes. However, in the instant case, the learned Chief Judge was not dealing with the transfer of commercial suit or dispute, but it is a case where the learned Chief Judge has transferred an original suit pending on the file of one of the Additional Chief Judge’s Court to the Special Court at Hyderabad constituted under the Commercial Courts Act, 2015. On a conjoint reading of Sections 15 and 16 of Commercial Courts Act together with Section 24 of CPC, I am of the considered view that the Chief Judge Civil Court, Hyderabad/Principal District Judge of any District in the State of Telangana lacks jurisdiction either to withdraw any suit or appeal from the Special Court under Commercial Courts Act, 2015 or to transfer any regular suit to that Special Court by withdrawing the same from any of the Additional District Courts or Additional Chief Judges Courts. The jurisdiction for transfer of pending commercial disputes as envisaged lies with the commercial appellate division of the High Court and the jurisdiction for transfer of any regular suit to the special Court constituted under the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 lies with the High Court under Section 24 of CPC. Therefore, such course of action adopted by the learned Chief Judge withdrawing OS No.908 of 2019 from the file of the learned X Additional Chief Judge and transferring the same to the Court of Special Judge for trial of Commercial Disputes under Commercial Courts Act, 2015 is impermissible for the simple reason that there is no other enabling provision in the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 authorizing or empowering the Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad or Principal District Judge of any Judicial District in the State for such transfer. 14. 14. The point No.(ii) is accordingly answered holding that the learned Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad erred in transferring OS No.908 of 2019 to the Special Court in the cadre of District Judge for trial and disposal of Commercial Disputes at Hyderabad. 15. The petitioners have filed this Tr.CMP under Section 24 of CPC assailing the orders dated 23.11.2021 in Tr.OP No.2 of 2021 on the file of the Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. Be it stated that Section 24 of CPC only deals with general power of transfer and withdrawal of any suit, appeal or other proceedings, with concurrent jurisdiction on the High Court and the District Court. In such circumstances, parties, if any aggrieved by the orders passed by the Principal District Judges or Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad in Tr.OPs cannot assail the said orders before the High Court by filing Tr.CMP under Section 24 of CPC, but the proper course would be filing a Civil Revision Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India questioning the legality and validity of such orders. Therefore, the Registry is directed not to entertain any such Tr.CMPs hereinafter against the orders of the District Courts passed under Section 24 of CPC in the Tr.OPs. In such cases, the remedy lies under Article 227 of the Constitution of India questioning the legality and validity of orders passed by the District Courts in Tr.OPs under Section 24 of CPC. 16. For the above said reasons and conclusions, I hold that the Principal District Judge/Chief Judge, City Civil Court has power to withdraw a suit or appeal or other proceedings pending on the file of one Additional District Judge and to transfer to other Additional District Court in the Unit. However, Principal District Judges in the State or Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad have no such power either to withdraw or to transfer a suit or appeal or other proceedings pending on the file of Special Court in the cadre of District Judge for trial and disposal of Commercial Disputes at Hyderabad or at Ranga Reddy. Further, the Registry is hereby directed not to entertain any Tr.CMPs assailing the orders in Tr.OPs filed under Section 24 of CPC before respective District Courts and the proper course to assail the orders in Tr.OP is only by filing a Civil Revision Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Further, the Registry is hereby directed not to entertain any Tr.CMPs assailing the orders in Tr.OPs filed under Section 24 of CPC before respective District Courts and the proper course to assail the orders in Tr.OP is only by filing a Civil Revision Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 17. In the result, Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed. The order dated 23.11.2021 in Tr.OP No.2 of 2021 on the file of the Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad transferring OS No.908 of 2019 from the file of the learned X Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad to the Special Court in the cadre of District Judge for trial and disposal of Commercial Disputes, Hyderabad is hereby set aside. However, the respondents are at liberty to move appropriate application before the High Court for withdrawal and transfer of OS No.908 of 2019 pending on the file of the learned X Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad to the Special Court in the cadre of District Judge for trial and disposal of Commercial Disputes at Hyderabad to be tried along with COS No.37 of 2019 pending on the file of that Court. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any pending in this Tr.CMP shall stand closed.