1. Petition for transfer of matrimonial proceedings under Section 25 of the Code of Civil Procedure. (Para 1 )
Back
Next 
2024 Supreme(SC) 1371
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
C.T. RAVIKUMAR, PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, JJ.
Sanjana Gautam Daryanani - Petitioner
Versus
Gautam Rochiram Daryanani – Respondent
Transfer Petition(C) No. 42 of 2024
Decided On : 15-07-2024
Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Sahil Tagotra, AOR, Mr. Venkata Supreeth, Adv., Mr. Sujay Jain, Adv., Ms. Sakshi Garg, Adv.
For the Respondent: Mr. Rajat Sharma, Adv., Mr. Rakesh Tiwari, Adv., Ms. Shruti Bisht, AOR
For the Petitioner: Mr. Sahil Tagotra, AOR, Mr. Venkata Supreeth, Adv., Mr. Sujay Jain, Adv., Ms. Sakshi Garg, Adv.
For the Respondent: Mr. Rajat Sharma, Adv., Mr. Rakesh Tiwari, Adv., Ms. Shruti Bisht, AOR
Transfer of family law proceedings denied when no compelling justification presented; expenses for virtual attendance permitted.
Headnote:(A) Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Section 25 - Transfer of Petition - Petition seeking transfer of proceedings from one jurisdiction to another - Court finds no case for transfer - Dismissal of petition upheld with conditions on travel expenses for the petitioner-wife - Respondent-husband to bear travel costs when presence is required. (Paras 1-3)
(B) Family Law - Virtual attendance for proceedings allowed unless physical presence is necessary - Court emphasizes the importance of accessibility to the judicial process, especially for parties involved in family disputes. (Paras 2-3)
Facts of the case:
The transfer petition sought to move a family court case pending in Mumbai to Visakhapatnam, reflecting concerns over the petitioner's ability to attend in person. Court found no basis for transfer.
Findings of Court:
Dismissal of transfer petition maintained; conditions imposed on travel expenses to facilitate the petitioner's participation in proceedings.
Issues: Whether the transfer of the Family Court petition was justified based on the petitioner’s circumstances.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court ruled that the convenience of the petitioner alone does not warrant a transfer; the impact on the proceedings and necessity of the petitioner's presence were key considerations.
Result: Transfer Petition dismissed.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. Request for transfer of proceedings from one family court to another jurisdiction. (Para 1 , 2 )
3. The court determined that the materials on record did not establish a sufficient case to justify the transfer of the proceedings. (Para 2 )
4. Transfer of proceedings under Section 25 of the Code of Civil Procedure is contingent upon the establishment of a sufficient case for such transfer. (Para 2 )
5. Transfer petition dismissed; virtual attendance permitted; respondent ordered to pay travel and stay expenses if physical presence is required. (Para 2 , 3 )
6. Under what conditions is a transfer petition under Section 25 of the Code of Civil Procedure granted?
A transfer petition is granted when the court, after hearing the parties and perusing the record, finds that a sufficient case for transfer has been made out. (Para 2 )
7. May a party be allowed to attend court proceedings virtually in matrimonial disputes?
Yes, the court may permit a party to attend proceedings virtually unless their physical presence is deemed inevitable or specifically required by the Trial Court. (Para 3 )
8. Can the court order the payment of travel expenses for a party required to attend court physically?
Yes, the court can direct the respondent to pay fixed travel and stay expenses to the petitioner for each date their physical presence is required by the Trial Court. (Para 3 )
ORDER :
1. This petition is filed under Section 25 of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking transfer of Petition No. 1591 of 2023, titled “Gautam Rochiram Daryanani vs. Sanjana Gautam Daryanani“ pending before the Family Court at Bandra, Mumbai, Maharashtra to Family Court, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties on both sides and perused the materials available on record. On such consideration, we are of the view that the case for transfer is not made out. Consequently, the Transfer Petition is dismissed.
3. However, the petitioner-wife is permitted to attend the proceedings virtually, unless her presence is inevitable and required by the Trial Court. However, we make it clear that whenever the presence of the petitioner-wife is required by the Trial Court, the respondent-husband shall meet the expenses of the petitioner-wife relating to her travel and stay, which amount is fixed at Rs.20,000/-. Needless to say that this amount shall be paid to the petitioner-wife by the respondent-husband on each date when the presence of petitioner-wife is required by the Trial Court.
4. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
