Back
2017 Supreme(SC) 833
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
N.V. Ramana, Prafulla C. Pant, JJ.
P. Ayyanar Pothi – Petitioner
Versus
Supriya Ayyanar Pothi – Respondent
Civil Appeal No. 3702 of 2017 (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 2380 of 2016)
Decided On : 27-02-2017
For the Petitioners: Mr. C. Paramasivam, Mr. Y. Arunagiri and Mr. P. Ramesh.
For the Respondents: Mr. Shankar Chillarge, Mr. Prateek Dhir, M/s. Lawyer S. Knit & Co.
The interpretation of Section 25 of the Civil Procedure Code and the exclusive jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in inter-State transfer and transfer of cases from one High Court to another High Court or its subordinate Courts.
Headnote:
Jurisdiction - Transfer of Divorce Proceedings - Interpretation of Section 25 of Civil Procedure Code
Fact of the Case:
The appellant-husband challenged the validity of the order passed by the High Court of Bombay, Aurangabad, which entertained a transfer application filed by the respondent-wife seeking transfer of the divorce petition from a Subordinate Court in Tamil Nadu to the Family Court at Aurangabad, Maharashtra.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that the Bombay High Court committed jurisdictional error by entertaining the transfer application, as the power to transfer cases from one High Court to another High Court or its subordinate Courts is vested solely in the Supreme Court, as per Section 25 of the Civil Procedure Code.
Issues: Jurisdiction of the High Court to entertain transfer application from a subordinate Court of another High Court.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court interpreted Section 25 of the Civil Procedure Code, which clearly vests the power relating to inter-State transfer and transfer of cases from one High Court to another High Court or its subordinate Courts solely on the Supreme Court.
Final Decision: The appeal was allowed, and the impugned order passed by the Bombay High Court was set aside.
ORDER :
1. Leave granted.
2. This appeal has been filed by the appellant-husband challenging the validity of the impugned order dated 9th September, 2015 passed by the High Court of Bombay, Aurangabad.
3. The controversy in this case is that the respondent-wife has filed Miscellaneous Civil Application No. 132 of 2015 before the High Court of Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad seeking transfer of the divorce petition bearing HMOP No. 224 of 2013 filed by the appellant-husband before a Subordinate Court at Srivilliputtur, District Viruddhanagar, Tamil Nadu to the Family Court at Aurangabad, Maharashtra. The Aurangabad Bench of Bombay High Court entertained the transfer application and while issuing notice, stayed the divorce proceedings pending before the subordinate Court of Madras High Court.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant argues that the Bombay High Court committed jurisdictional error by entertaining the transfer application as it does not possess the power to transfer a case pending before a subordinate Court of another High Court.
5. Section 25 of Civil Procedure Code clearly envisages that the power relating to the inter-State transfer and transfer of cases from one High Court to another High Court or its subordinate Courts is vested solely on this Court and not on the High Courts. Thus, in view of the statutory provisions, the High Court of Bombay does not have the jurisdiction to entertain a petition seeking transfer of divorce proceedings from a subordinate Court of Madras High Court.
6. For the aforesaid reasons, we allow this appeal and set aside the impugned order passed by the Bombay High Court. No costs.
