Point of Law : Transfer of matrimonial cases - inconveniences of the wife if the proceedings were to be transferred to Bengaluru outweighs the husband''s inconveniences in permitting the proceedings to continue in Mangaluru. That apart clearly the conveniences of the wife would require continuance of the proceedings at the Family Court at Mangaluru.

ORDER :

1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner-husband seeking for withdrawal of proceedings in M.C.No.144/2020 pending on the file of I Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Mangaluru, Dakshina Kannada and transfer of the same to the Court of the Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru.

1. Facts of the case:-

(i) The facts that are made out in the petition are that the petitioner and respondent have entered into a matrimonial relationship by solemnization of marriage on 06.12.2009 at Virudhunagar, Tamilnadu. It is stated that subsequently the marriage was registered on 22.10.2010, and that initially the petitioner and respondent were residing at Bengaluru at the time of their marriage. The further fact that is not in dispute is that the petitioner is a software professional and has been working in 'Oracle India Pvt. Ltd.,' while respondent is a doctor by profession presently practicing at Mangaluru.

(ii) It is stated that from within the wedlock, the petitioner and respondent have two sons, viz., Master Neev Sriram and Master Kanav Sriram, both of whom are staying alongwith the respondent as on date, at Mangaluru. It is submitted that there were differences in the matrimonial relationship and frequent quarrel amongst them. In December 2017, it is asserted that the respondent has left the matrimonial home alongwith her children and has been residing in Mangaluru ever since, along with her parents.

(iii) Facts would also reveal that there are various litigations pending between the parties and at present, M.F.A.No.3481/2020 filed by the petitioner-husband challenging the order passed in G & WC No.8/2018 is pending consideration before this Court and also CCC No.526/2020 (Civil) is stated to have been initiated by the petitioner herein, which is pending consideration.

(iv) The visitation rights have been granted to the petitioner-husband to meet the children two days in a week during the week end at the place of residence of respondent as per the order dated 22.09.2020 passed in M.F.A.No.3481/2020.

(v) The petitioner in the meanwhile has filed the present petition seeking transfer of proceedings in M.C.No.144/2020 before the Family Court, Bengaluru instituted by the respondent seeking dissolution of matrimonial relationship and has submitted that the Court at Mangaluru is about 350 Kms. from Bengaluru and travelling such distance is difficult and inconveniences him, that it interferes with his work and would involve obtaining leave from his employer to attend the legal proceedings, that there are other litigations pending before the High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru including M.F.A.No. 3481/2020 and CCC No.526/2020 in which the respondent is prosecuting through a legal counsel and accordingly, the respondent would not find it inconvenient to attend the proceedings, if the same is transferred to Family Court at Bengaluru.

2. Contentions of petitioner:-

(i) Ms.Jayna Kothari, learned Senior Counsel appearing for Mr.Rohan Kothari for the petitioner has contended that the witnesses in support of petitioner’s defence in M.C.No.144/2020 instituted by the respondent-wife seeking dissolution of marriage are predominantly residents of Bengaluru and for a fair trial, it would be appropriate that the proceedings are transferred to the Court at Bengaluru. It is also submitted that the respondent being a medical professional is capable of prosecuting the proceedings at Bengaluru.

(ii) It is further contended that the balance of convenience or inconvenience to the petitioner/plaintiff or respondent/defendant or the witnesses and all other relevant considerations need to be taken note of and it cannot be a universal rule that in all matters, the inconvenience of the wife is given precedence.

(iii) It is also submitted that the respondent, who is a doctor by profession who is working at Mangaluru leaves her children with her parents when she goes to work and hence, the mere fact that she has children residing with her ought not to c