SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2004 Supreme(SC) 1436

S.N.VARIAVA, H.K.SEMA
PRATIBHA KHEMKA – Appellant
Versus
SANJAY KUMAR KHEMKA – Respondent


ORDER

1. HEARD PARTIES.

2. THIS IS THE WIFES PETITION FOR TRANSFER OF HM NO. 54-A OF 2003 FROM THE FAMILY COURT AT DISTRICT SATNA (M.P.) TO THE FAMILY COURT AT DISTRICT BARABANKI (U.P.) ON THE GROUND THAT BEING A SINGLE LADY IT IS DIFFICULT FOR HER TO TRAVEL 600 KM. IT IS CLAIMED THAT THERE IS NO DIRECT TRANSPORTATION BETWEEN THE TWO PLACES. IT IS ALSO STATED, AND NOT DENIED, THAT SHE HAS A SMALL SON WHO IS STUDYING IN 1ST STANDARD AND WHO HAS RECENTLY HAD A CATARACT OPERATION. SHE THEREFORE REQUIRES TO BE WITH HER SON WHICH MAKES IT DIFFICULT FOR HER TO TRAVEL. IT IS FURTHER STATED THAT SHE HAS AGED PARENTS WHO ARE NOT IN A POSITION TO TRAVEL WITH HER AND THAT HER MOTHER HAS RECENTLY SUFFERED A HEART ATTACK.

3. THE PETITION IS OPPOSED BY THE RESPONDENT HUSBAND MAINLY ON THE GROUND THAT IF HE HAS TO GO TO BARABANKI THERE WILL BE THREAT TO HIS LIFE INASMUCH AS THAT IS A CRIME-INFECTED AREA AND THE PETITIONER HAS ALREADY THREATENED THAT IF HE COMES TO BARABANKI HE WILL BE KILLED. THE RESPONDENT OFFERS TO PAY FOR ALL TRAVEL EXPENSES, OVER AND ABOVE, THE SUM OF RS 3000 ALREADY DIRECTED TO BE PAID BY THE FAMILY COURT.

4. IN OUR VIEW, THE CONVENIENCE OF THE LADY HAS TO BE KEPT IN MIND. T

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top