SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
S. ABDUL NAZEER, J.K. MAHESHWARI, JJ.
N.C.V. Aishwarya – APPELLANT
VERSUS
A.S. Saravana Karthik Sha – RESPONDENT
Civil Appeal No(s). 4894 of 2022 (Arising out of S.L.P.(C)No(s).16465 of 2021)
Decided On : 18-07-2022
Transfer of Case - Matrimonial Matter - Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, Section 9; Code of Civil Procedure, Section 24 - The court discussed the principles of transfer of cases in matrimonial matters, considering the economic soundness of the parties, social strata, and convenience of the wife. It also emphasized the desirability of trying interdependent cases together to avoid multiplicity of proceedings and conflict of decisions.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant-wife sought transfer of a petition filed by her husband for annulment of their marriage from the Family Court in Vellore to Chennai, citing her inability to travel to Vellore due to her age, financial dependence on her parents, and the pendency of two other cases in Chennai.
Finding of the Court:
The High Court's rejection of the transfer petition was unjustified, considering the appellant's circumstances and the desirability of trying all three cases together to avoid multiplicity of proceedings and conflict of decisions.
Issues: The main issue was the transfer of the matrimonial case from Vellore to Chennai, taking into account the appellant's circumstances and the desirability of trying interdependent cases together.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the economic soundness of the parties, the convenience of the wife, and the desirability of trying interdependent cases together to avoid multiplicity of proceedings and conflict of decisions.
Final Decision: The appeal was allowed, and the matrimonial case was transferred from the Family Court in Vellore to the jurisdictional Family Court in Chennai. The three cases were directed to be tried together in the Family Court in Chennai.
ORDER
1. Leave granted.
2. This appeal is directed against the Order dated 19.11.2020 in TR.C.M.P. No.473 of 2020 whereby the High Court of Judicature at Madras has rejected the petition filed by the appellant-wife seeking transfer of a petition, F.C.O.P. No.125 of 2020 filed by her respondent-husband before the Family Court, Vellore, to the Family Court at Chennai.
3. The marriage between the appellant and the respondent was arranged and solemnized on 05.03.2020 at Kanna Mahal, Anna Salai, Vellore, in accordance with Hindu rituals and customs. It is the case of the respondent that the appellant started quarreling and fighting with the respondent for petty things and refused to consummate the marriage. The respondent filed the aforesaid F.C.O.P. No.125 of 2020 before the Family Court, Vellore, for annulment of their marriage.
4. The appellant is a resident of Chennai. She has also filed two cases. H.M.O.P. No.1741 of 2021 has been filed by her before the Family Court at Chennai against her husband for restitution of conjugal rights under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, and M.C. Sr. No.672 of 2021 before the Family Court at Chennai for maintenance under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C.
5. The appellant in her petition filed under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act has contended amongst others that without any reasonable excuse, the respondent withdrew from her society and that the respondent is bound to live with the appellant and give her conjugal companionship.
6. The appellant filed a petition under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure before the High Court of Judicature at Madras for transfer of F.C.O.P. No.125 of 2020 pending on the file of the Family Court, Vellore to the Family Court at Chennai. According to the appellant, her parents are old and that she is aged 21 years and not in a position to travel to Vellore through out the court proceedings without having any support. In addition, the appellant contends that it would not be possible for her aged parents to accompany her to Vellore. She is totally dependent on her parents morally and financially. She is not employed and does not have any other source of income. Moreover, she does not have any accommodation for staying at Vellore. The respondent has opposed the said petition. As noticed above, the High Court has dismissed the transfer petition.
7. We have heard learned counsel for the parties.
8. It is not disputed that the appellant is the resident of Chennai and that the appellant’s husband-respondent herein is the resident of Vellore and he is employed. The appellant who is 21 years old does not have any source of income of her own as she is not employed and is totally dependent on her parents for her livelihood. In order to attend the court proceedings of the case filed by her husband at Vellore she has to travel alone all the way from Chennai to Vellore as her parents are not in a position to accompany her on account of their old age. Secondly, the appellant has also filed a petition, H.M.O.P. No.1741 of 2021, for restitution of conjugal rights and another petition, M.C. Sr. No.672 of 2021, for her maintenance before the Family Court at Chennai.
9. The cardinal principle for exercise of power under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure is that the ends of justice should demand the transfer of the suit, appeal or other proceeding. In matrimonial matters, wherever Courts are called upon to consider the plea of transfer, the Courts have to take into consideration the economic soundness of both the parties, the social strata of the spouses and their behavioural pattern, their standard of life prior to the marriage and subsequent thereto and the circumstances of both the parties in eking out their livelihood and under whose protective umbrella they are seeking their sustenance to life. Given the prevailing socioeconomic paradigm in the Indian society, generally, it is the wife’s convenience which must be looked at while considering transfer.
10. Further, when
The convenience of the wife and the desirability of trying interdependent cases together to avoid multiplicity of proceedings and conflict of decisions are crucial factors in deciding the transfer of....
Transfer petitions in matrimonial cases allowed prioritizing wife's convenience with child care and travel hardship under Section 24 CPC.
The residence of the wife determines jurisdiction in matrimonial cases, and the court must safeguard the interests and rights of women in such cases.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.