In transfer proceedings, the wife's convenience is paramount, and courts must utilize technology to ensure access to justice.

JUDGMENT :

Savitri Ratho, J.

1.This matter is taken up through Video Conferencing mode due to COVID-19 Pandemic.

2. Heard Mr.J.N.Panda, learned counsel for the petitioner-wife and Mr.B.S.Rayaguru, learned counsel for the opp. party-husband.

3. Though this case has been listed along with TRP (C) No. 3 of 2018 filed on behalf of the present petitioner- wife- Smt. Prabhati Pattnaik, on account of non appearance of learned counsel for the opp party –husband-Aditya Kumar Pattnaik in that case , the same is adjourned on the request of Mr B. S Rayaguru , learned counsel who is appearing for the Opp party-husband in the present TRP( C ) .

4. In this petition, the petitioner-wife has prayed for a direction to transfer the Civil Proceeding No.54 of 2017 pending before the Court of learned Judge, Family Court, Bhawanipatna to the Court of learned Judge, Family Court, Berhampur.

5. Mr. Panda, learned counsel for the petitioner-wife states that the petitioner is working as Asst. Scientific Officer, RFSL, Berhampur and being a lady it would be very difficult on her part to attend the court at Bhawanipatna in the district of Kalahandi which is 350 K.Ms away from Berhampur where she is now residing. He further submits that in the case of Sumita Singh v. Kumar Sanjay and another reported in AIR 2002 SC 396, the Hon’ble Apex Court has held that the wife’s convenience must be looked into while considering the application for transfer of a case.

6. Mr B.S. Rayaguru, learned counsel for the opp party-husband although not disputing the factual aspects, submits that inconvenience will be caused to the opp –party husband if the application for transfer is allowed and to mitigate this inconvenience, the transferee court may be directed to dispose of the proceeding within a stipulated period.

7. In the case of Sumita Singh v. Kumar Sanjay and another reported in AIR 2002 SC 396, while turning down the husband’s objection that he was unemployed while the wife being educated and well to do , can travel to Bihar from Delhi, has held that it being the husband’s suit against the wife , the wife’s convenience must be looked into while considering the application for transfer of the case.

8. At this juncture, it would be apposite to refer to the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Krishna Veni Nagam vs Harish Nagam reported in (2017) 4 SCC 150 . The directions contained in paragraph 18 of the said judgment are especially relevant in today’s situation in view of the disruption caused by the Covid-19 pandemic.

9. While allowing the application of the wife for transfer of the proceedings under section -13 of the Hindu Marriage Act from the Court of the Family Judge , Jabalpur to the Court of the Family Judge , Hyderabad , the Hon’ble Apex court had taken notice of the fact that the Apex court is flooded with petitions for transfer and having regard to the convenience of the wife , transfer is normally allowed but in the process the litigants have to travel to the Supreme Court and spend on litigation and whether the same could be avoided . After taking note of the suggestions of learned Amicus Curiae and the learned Additional Solicitor General , it was observed as follows:

….”13. We have considered the above suggestions. In this respect, we may also refer to the doctrine of forum non conveniens which can be applied in matrimonial proceedings for advancing interest of justice. Under the said doctrine, the court exercises its inherent jurisdiction to stay proceedings at a forum which is considered not to be convenient and there is any other forum which is considered to be more convenient for the interest of all the parties at the ends of justice. In Modi Entertainment Network v. W.S.G. Cric