HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
Kuldeep Mathur, J.
Bhavna – Appellant
Versus
Abhishek Soni – Respondent
S.B. Civil Transfer Appl. No. 105/2022
Decided On : 05-08-2022
Transfer Petition - Transfer of Divorce Petition - Section 24 of CPC, Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 - [Section 24 CPC, Hindu Marriage Act, 1955] - The court allowed the transfer petition filed by the petitioner-wife under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking transfer of the divorce petition filed by the respondent-husband under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 from the Court of learned Judge, Family Court, Chittorgarh to the court of learned Judge, Family Court, Ajmer. The court emphasized the importance of considering the convenience of female litigants and the need to avoid putting them under undue hardship, citing relevant case law and legal provisions.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner-wife filed a transfer petition under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking transfer of the divorce petition filed by the respondent-husband under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 from the Court of learned Judge, Family Court, Chittorgarh to the court of learned Judge, Family Court, Ajmer, citing practical difficulties in attending court proceedings at Chittorgarh due to the distance and her custody of a minor child.
Finding of the Court:
The court allowed the transfer petition, emphasizing the importance of considering the convenience of female litigants and the need to avoid putting them under undue hardship.
Issues: The main issue was whether the divorce petition should be transferred from the Court of learned Judge, Family Court, Chittorgarh to the court of learned Judge, Family Court, Ajmer under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure and emphasized the need to consider the convenience of female litigants and avoid putting them under undue hardship, citing relevant case law including Sumita Singh v. Kumar Sanjay & Ors., Sarkar (Shome) v. Pardip Sarkar, Manju Varma v. State of U.P. and Arti Rani @ Pinki Devi v. Dharmendra Kumar Gupta.
Final Decision: The transfer petition filed by the petitioner-wife was allowed, and the divorce petition was ordered to be transferred from the Court of learned Judge, Family Court, Chittorgarh to the court of learned Judge, Family Court, Ajmer having competent jurisdiction.
JUDGMENT
1. The present transfer petition has been filed by the petitioner- wife under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking transfer of divorce petition filed by the respondent-husband under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 being Civil Misc. Case No. 92/2021 ("Abhishek Soni v. Smt. Bhavna") pending before the Court of learned Judge, Family Court, Chittorgarh to the court of learned Judge, Family Court, Ajmer.
2. Heard.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner-wife submits that the marriage was solemnized between the petitioner and respondent on 05.03.2016 as per Hindu rites. It is pleaded that the petitioner wife has lodged FIR for offences under Sections 498A, 406, 323 of IPC which is pending before learned Judicial Magistrate, Vijaynagar, District Ajmer. It is further pleaded that the petitioner is having custody of minor female child. The distance from Chittorgarh to Ajmer is more than 250 Kms. Counsel has submitted that it is not practical for the petitioner-wife to travel alone with minor child to attend court proceedings at Chittorgarh. She will be put under great degree of hardship in defending the case being Civil Misc. Case No. 92/2021 ("Abhishek Soni v. Smt. Bhavna") pending before the Court of learned Judge, Family Court, Chittorgarh. She has prayed that the case pending before Court of learned Judge, Family Court, Chittorgarh may be transferred the court of learned Judge, Family Court, Ajmer.
4. On 25.05.2022, notice of this transfer petition was issued to the respondent and the proceedings of the case No. 92/2021 pending before the court below were stayed.
5. This Court as well as by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sumita Singh v. Kumar Sanjay & Ors., reported in (2001) 10 SCC 41; Sarkar (Shome) v. Pardip Sarkar [Transfer Petition (Civil) No.622/2007 decided by Supreme Court on 10.11.2008] Manju Varma v. State of U.P. and Ors. [Civil Appeal No. 8290 of 2002 decided by the Supreme Court on 17.11.2004] and Arti Rani @ Pinki Devi v. Dharmendra Kumar Gupta, reported in (2008) 9 SCC 353 has held that Courts are required to give more weight and consideration to the convenience of the female litigants and transfer legal proceedings from one court to another should ordinarily be allowed. Taking into consideration their convenience, the Court should desist from putting female litigants under undue hardship.
6. Section 24 CPC reads as under:
"24. General power of transfer and
withdrawal:
(1) On the application of any of the parties and after notice to the parties and after hearing such of them as desired to be heard, or of its own motion without such notice, the High Court or the District Court may at any stage-
(a) transfer any suit, appeal or other proceeding pending before it for trial or disposal to any Court subordinate to it and competent to try or dispose of the same, or
(b) withdraw any suit, appeal or other proceeding pending in any court subordinate to it; and
(i) try or dispose of the same; or
(ii) transfer the same for trial or disposal to any Court subordinate to it and competent to try or dispose of the same; or
(iii) re-transfer the same for trial or disposal to the Court from which it was withdrawn. (2) Where any suit or proceeding has been transferred or withdrawn under sub-section (1), the Court which is thereafter to try or dispose of such suit or proceeding may, subject to any special directions in the case of any order of transfer, either retry it or proceed from the point at which it was transferred or withdrawn.
(3) For the purposes of this section,-
(a) Courts of Additional and Assistant Judges shall be deemed to be subordinate to the District Court;
(b) "proceeding" includes a proceeding for the execution of a decree or order.
(4) the Court trying any suit transferred or withdrawn under this section from a Court of Small Causes shall, for the purposes of such suit, be deemed to be a Court of Small Causes (5) A suit or proceeding may be transferred under this section from a Court which has no jurisdiction
The central legal point established in the judgment is the importance of considering the convenience of female litigants and avoiding putting them under undue hardship when deciding on the transfer o....
Courts are required to give more weight and consideration to the convenience of the female litigants, and transfer legal proceedings from one court to another should ordinarily be allowed, taking int....
The court established that in transfer applications, the convenience of the female litigant is paramount, especially when she has caregiving responsibilities.
In matrimonial transfer petitions, wife's convenience prevails due to distance, minor child care, financial constraints without spousal support, prioritizing balance of convenience and justice.
The convenience of the female litigants and the factors to be considered in matrimonial disputes, as established in relevant judgments, are crucial in deciding the transfer of legal proceedings.
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.