1. Transfer petition — Matrimonial proceeding — Wife residing in different jurisdiction with child — Concurrent suit pending in same jurisdiction. (Para 2 )
Back
Next 
1999 Supreme(SC) 315
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
D.P.Mohapatra : R.P.Sethi : S.P.Bharucha
B.S.Jayashree
Versus
Ashok R.Kamble
Case No. : 1030 of 1998
Date of Decision : 3/15/99
Important Points
The court may transfer family court proceedings to a different jurisdiction to ensure convenience, particularly considering the residence of the wife and minor child and the existence of other pending litigation in that jurisdiction.
Subject
Family Law - Transfer Petition
Act Referred
Headnote
(A) Transfer Petition - Family Law - Transfer of proceedings from one Family Court to another - Consideration of the residence of the wife and the child, and the existence of other pending litigation in the target jurisdiction - Transfer petition allowed where the wife resides in the target city with a minor child and the respondent is already required to attend another suit in the same city. (Para 2)
(B) Deposit of costs - Respondent deposited travel costs in the wrong court - Since the transfer petition is allowed, the respondent is permitted to withdraw the said amount from the court where it was deposited. (Para 3)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner wife, residing in a specific city with her eight-year-old daughter, sought the transfer of a petition pending in a Family Court in another city. It was noted that another suit was already filed in the city where the wife resides, which the respondent would have to attend. The respondent had deposited travel costs in the original court instead of the court contemplated by a previous order.
Findings of Court:
The court found it appropriate to allow the transfer petition given the residence of the wife and child and the existing litigation in the target city. The respondent is permitted to withdraw the travel costs deposited in the original court.
Issues: Whether the transfer petition should be allowed based on the convenience of the parties and the location of other pending litigation.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the transfer of proceedings is appropriate when the wife resides in a different city with a minor child and the respondent is already required to travel to that city for other legal proceedings.
Result: Transfer petition allowed.
(B) Deposit of costs - Respondent deposited travel costs in the wrong court - Since the transfer petition is allowed, the respondent is permitted to withdraw the said amount from the court where it was deposited. (Para 3)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner wife, residing in a specific city with her eight-year-old daughter, sought the transfer of a petition pending in a Family Court in another city. It was noted that another suit was already filed in the city where the wife resides, which the respondent would have to attend. The respondent had deposited travel costs in the original court instead of the court contemplated by a previous order.
Findings of Court:
The court found it appropriate to allow the transfer petition given the residence of the wife and child and the existing litigation in the target city. The respondent is permitted to withdraw the travel costs deposited in the original court.
Issues: Whether the transfer petition should be allowed based on the convenience of the parties and the location of other pending litigation.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the transfer of proceedings is appropriate when the wife resides in a different city with a minor child and the respondent is already required to travel to that city for other legal proceedings.
Result: Transfer petition allowed.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. Transfer of matrimonial proceedings — Grounds of residence of the wife and child — Existence of concurrent litigation in the target jurisdiction. (Para 2 )
3. Transfer of proceedings is appropriate when the wife resides in a specific jurisdiction with a child and another related suit is pending there. (Para 2 )
4. Matrimonial transfer petitions — Consideration of wife's residence and pending related litigation in the target jurisdiction as grounds for transfer. (Para 2 )
5. Transfer petition allowed — Proceedings transferred to the target Family Court — Respondent permitted to withdraw deposited costs. (Para 3 , 4 )
6. What factors are considered for transferring a matrimonial proceeding?
The court considers the residence of the wife and child and the existence of other pending suits in the target jurisdiction to determine if a transfer is appropriate. (Para 2 )
7. How is the issue of incorrectly deposited court costs handled upon transfer of a case?
Where costs were deposited in a court other than the one contemplated by the order, the court may permit the party to withdraw the amount upon granting the transfer. (Para 3 )
S.P.BHARUCHA, J.
(1) WE have heard counsel for the petitioner and the respondent-in-person
(2) HAVING regard to the fact that the petitioner wife is residing in Bangalore with the eight-year-old daughter of the marriage and having regard to the fact that there is another suit which is filed in Bangalore, which the respondent will have to attend to defend, we think it is appropriate that the transfer petition should be allowed.
(3) BY our order dated 15-2-1999 we have recorded the statement of the respondent that he would deposit in court within two weeks an amount equal to the cost of six return air tickets, Bangalore to Bombay. Pursuant thereto, the respondent has deposited the sum of Rs.33,708, but he has done so in the Family Court, Bombay, which was not what the order contemplated. In any event, having regard to the order that we pass on the transfer petition, it shall now be open to the respondent to withdraw the said amount and the Family Court, Bombay shall permit him to do so.
(4) THE transfer petition is allowed. Petition No. A-596 of 1998, pending in the Family Court at Bandra, Bombay, shall stand transferred to the Family Court, Bangalore. No order as to costs.
