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

2019 Supreme(Kar) 522

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
ASHOK G. NIJAGANNAVAR, J.
Smt. P.S. Bindhu W/o Jayaprakash Reddy – Petitioner
Versus
Sri. Jayaprakash G. S/o S.K. Gopal Reddy – Respondent
Civil Petition No. 170 of 2018
Decided On : 23-01-2019

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Sri. S. Shivaswamy.
For the Respondent: Sri. Zahid Ali.

Headnote:

Civil Procedure Code,1908 - Section 24 - Criminal Procedure Code,1973 - Section 125 - Divorce - Claim by petitioner-wife - Territorial jurisdiction - Petitioner that she was married to respondent as per Hindu rites and customs - Due to discord between couple respondent-husband has filed petition seeking divorce against petitioner-wife which is pending before II Additional Principal Judge Family Court Bangalore - Thereafter petitioner who is residing separately along with her parents KGF has filed a petition for restitution of conjugal rights which is pending before Principal Senior Civil Judge and Principal JMFC KGF which is numbered petitioner wife being a household lady is not having any income she is totally depending on her parents for her livelihood and a small child is also residing with petitioner wife said infant child requires continuous care by petitioner-wife –Held, Case is for arguments - Since petition filed by respondent-husband was earlier to that of petition filed by petitioner-wife for seeking restitution of conjugal rights those cases which are pending before KGF Courts shall be transferred to II Additional Principal Judge Family Court Bangalore and shall be tried together - But in instant case as could be seen petitioner-wife is residing in her parents’ house at Bangarpet along with her minor child - Court has opined that travel expenses can be borne by respondent-husband- Thus Court of opinion that these decisions are not aptly applicable to case on hand case as admitted by parties filed for divorce is pending before II Additional Principal Judge Family Court Bangalore and other petition filed by petitioner-wife for restitution of conjugal rights is pending before Principal Senior Civil Judge and Principal JMFC KGF Kolar and one more petition filed by petitioner-wife seeking maintenance is pending before Court- When two proceedings in different Courts which rise common question and law decision is interdependent it desirable that all cases are tried together with same Judge so as to avoid multiplicity in trial of same issues and conflict of decisions - Petition allowed

ORDER :

1. This petition is filed by the petitioner Smt. P.S. Bindu who is the respondent in M.C. No. 1023/2017 for transfer of the petition pending before the II Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Bangalore to Principal Senior Civil Judge and Principal JMFC, KGF, Kolar and to direct that M.C. No. 1023/2017 be clubbed and tried along with M.C. No. 68/2017 pending on the file of Principal Civil Judge and Principal JMFC, KGF, Kolar.

2. It is the case of the petitioner that she was married to the respondent on 14.11.2013 at SVR Kalyana Mantapa, Bangarpet, Kolar as per Hindu rites and customs. Due to discord between the couple, the respondent-husband has filed petition seeking divorce against the petitioner-wife in M.C. No. 1023/2017 which is pending before the II Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Bangalore. Thereafter, the petitioner who is residing separately along with her parents at Bangarpet, KGF has filed a petition for restitution of conjugal rights under Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 which is pending before the Principal Senior Civil Judge and Principal JMFC, KGF, Kolar which is numbered as M.C. No. 68/2017. The petitioner- wife being a household lady is not having any income, she is totally depending on her parents for her livelihood and a small child is also residing with the petitioner-wife. The said infant child requires continuous care by the petitioner-wife.

3. The respondent-husband has filed the M.C. Petition No. 1023/2017 at Bangalore to harass the petitioner-wife. The petitioner-wife has also filed case under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. in CMC No. 115/2017 before the Court of Bangarpet for maintenance. The respondent-husband has been appearing in the said case. The petitioner-wife without having any income is finding it difficult to attend the case at Bangalore. If the M.C. petition No. 1023/2017 filed before the II Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Bangalore, is transferred to the Court of Prl. Senior Civil Judge and Principal JMFC, KGF, Kolar and clubbed with M.C. No. 68/2017, the petitioner-wife can conveniently attend those cases and defend herself in those matters.

4. On service of summons, the respondent-husband has filed the objections and contended that the petitioner-wife has not made out any prime facie ground for seeking transfer of petition. The respondent-husband has filed the divorce petition on 20.2.2017 before the II Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Bangalore. After knowing the same, the petitioner-wife has filed a petition before the Principal Senior Civil Judge and Principal JMFC Court at KGF, Kolar on 29.6.2017 with a malafide intention and to harass the respondent-husband. The petitioner-wife has also filed petition under Section 125 of Cr.P.C seeking maintenance. The respondent-husband is suffering from Ankylosing Spondylities disease and he is undergoing regular treatment. As such, he is unable to travel and to attend the Courts at KGF, Kolar.

5. Further, it is contended that in order to avoid inconvenience to both the parties and for speedy disposal of all the three cases pending before various Courts may be transferred to one Court for proper adjudication. The Family Court, Bangalore City has power to adjudicate all the three cases and to dispose the said matters as early as possible. In divorce petition, the evidence of both respondent-husband and petitioner-wife are concluded. There are no valid grounds for granting the reliefs as sought for.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that after discord between the couple, the petitioner-wife was compelled to go to her parents’ house along with her minor child. The respondent-husband has filed a petition seeking divorce but the petitioner-wife who is willing to reside with her respondent-husband has filed a petition for seeking conjugal rights which is pending before the Principal Senior Civil Judge & Principal JMFC, KGF, Kolar. In order to maintain herself and her child, she has filed a application under Section 125

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top