IN THE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
DINESH MEHTA, J.
Uma Devi – Appellant
Versus
Vinod Kumar – Respondent
Civil Transfer Application No. 147 of 2017
Decided On : 19-04-2018
TRANSFER OF CASE - HINDU MARRIAGE ACT, 1955 - SECTION 13 - CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 - SECTION 24 - TRANSFER OF DIVORCE PETITION FROM BHINMAL TO SUMERPUR - CONVENIENCE OF PARTIES AND WITNESSES - REASONABLE APPREHENSION OF FAILURE OF JUSTICE - BALANCE OF CONVENIENCE -
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner-wife filed a transfer application under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking the transfer of a divorce petition filed by the respondent-husband from Bhinmal to Sumerpur. The petitioner-wife argued that it was difficult and troublesome for her to travel to Bhinmal for the hearings, as it was about 150 kms from Sumerpur and there was a lack of proper means of communication. She also contended that the respondent-husband, who was residing in Bhaiendar, Maharashtra, had to travel either to Bhinmal or Sumerpur to pursue the case.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that it would be convenient for both the petitioner-wife and the respondent-husband if the divorce petition was transferred to Sumerpur. The court noted that the petitioner-wife had filed a case against the respondent-husband under the Protection from Domestic Violence Act in Sumerpur, and that the respondent-husband had to travel to Sumerpur to pursue that case. The court also considered the distance between Bhinmal and Sumerpur, and the lack of proper means of communication between the two cities.
Issues: Whether the divorce petition should be transferred from Bhinmal to Sumerpur for the convenience of the parties and witnesses.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the judgment of Smt. Vinita vs. Himanshu, AIR 2017 Rajasthan 102, in which the court held that the provisions of Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure provide a great deal of discretion to the court, but that such discretion must be exercised on the basis of sound principles. The court also noted that various judicial pronouncements have laid down broad propositions as to what may constitute a ground for transfer of a case, including balance of convenience or inconvenience to the parties or witnesses, convenience or inconvenience arising out of a particular place of trial, and reasonable apprehension in the mind of a litigant that he or she might not get justice in the court where the proceedings are pending.
Final Decision: The court allowed the transfer application and ordered the transfer of the divorce petition from the Additional District Judge, Bhinmal to the Additional District Judge, Sumerpur.
1. Despite service of notice, nobody has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent- husband.
2. The present transfer application under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking transfer of the Divorce Petition No. 52/2014 titled as Vinod Vaishnav vs. Smt. Uma, under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, filed by the respondent-husband, which is pending before Additional District Judge, Bhinmal to the competent Court at Sumerpur.
3. Mr. Ramesh Purohit, learned counsel for the petitioner-wife, narrating the facts relevant for the purpose of deciding the present transfer application, submitted that the petitioner got married with the respondent on 27.02.2009, after observing the customs and rituals prevailing in Hindus. However, her matrimonial relationship with the respondent-husband could not go smoothly, in wake of ill-treatment meted out to her by the respondent-husband, for which, she has come to Sumerpur to live with her parents.
4. The petitioner has filed a case under Section 12 read with Sections 18, 19, 20, 22 and 23 of the Protection from Domestic Violence Act against the respondent-husband in the Court of competent jurisdiction, which is pending adjudication before Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Sumerpur, District Pali. In the meanwhile, the respondent-husband has filed a petition for divorce under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act before the Additional District Judge, Bhinmal.
5. Mr. Ramesh Purohit, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner finds it difficult and troublesome to travel to Bhinmal, which is about 150 kms. from Sumerpur, as there is absence of proper means of communication and she needs a male companion for attending the hearing at Bhinmal. Mr. Purohit further contended that the respondent- husband, who is presently residing at Bhaiendar, District Thane (Maharashtra) has to take journey, either to Bhinmal or to Sumerpur to pursue the present cases. In view of these facts, Mr. Purohit contended that it would be proper, in the interest of justice and convenient to all concerned, if the matter (Divorce Petition No. 52/2014) is transferred to a competent Court at Sumerpur.
6. In the fact situation obtaining in the present case, I am of the considered view that, if the matter is transferred to Sumerpur from Bhinmal, it would be not only convenient to the petitioner- wife but also to the respondent-husband, who is already contesting a case filed by the petitioner-wife at Sumerpur.
7. My aforesaid views are fortified from the judgment rendered by this Court in the case of Smt. Vinita vs. Himanshu, AIR 2017 Rajasthan 102.
8. It will not be out of context to quote relevant excerpts from the judgment of Smt. Vinita vs. Himanshu (supra), wherein this Court has held as under:-
"It is, therefore, felt imperative to examine and explore the necessary principles governing transfer applications, filed by families, entangled in forensic fights, while invoking powers conferred upon this Court by Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
According to this Court, the provisions of Section 24 of the Code provides a great deal of discretion in the court, however, such discretion is required to be exercised on the basis of sound principles. It is true that the discretionary power, more particularly, the jurisdiction in relation to transfer of cases, can not be imprisoned or bound within a straight jacket or cast- iron formula, uniformly applicable to all situations, yet the courts are required to be mindful of the fact that the power to transfer a case must be exercised with due care, caution and circumspection.
Keeping in mind the provisions and mandate of Sections 24 and 25 of the Code, various judicial pronouncements have laid down broad propositions as to what may constitute a ground for transfer of a case. Generally speaking, they are, balance of convenience or inconvenience to the plaintiff or defendant or witnesses, convenience or inconvenience arising out of a particu
AI
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.