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

2019 Supreme(Online)(Bom) 2810

DEEPA PIYUSH KHATRI – Appellant
Versus
PIYUSH BANDULAL KHATRI – Respondent


1. The learned Advocate for the petitioner/wife has put forth the following prayers in this application u/s 23(3), 24 and Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure :-

“1. This Misc.Civil Application may kindly be allowed, and

2. This Hon'ble Court may please be transferred the proceedings of Divorce-petition bearing N o.A-447/2018 pending in the files of the Ld.Family Court at Aurangabad to the Hon'ble Principal Judge of Family Court at Hubballi (Karnataka State)”

2. The issue, therefore, is as to whether this Court can exercise its jurisdiction u/s 24 to transfer a proceeding from a Court subordinate to this Court, to a Court subordinate to another High Court.

3. The learned Advocate for the applicant has strenuously canvased that u/s 23 and especially Sub Section 3, this Court has the power and jurisdiction to transfer such a proceeding to another Court which is sub ordinate to the Karnataka High Court. Reliance is placed on the following judgments :-

“1. Misc.Civil Application No.34/2014 of Bombay High Court, Bench at Aurangabad. Lavanya w/o Rameshwar Nalamwar v/s Rameshwar s/o Dadarao Nalamwar (Coram : Shri T.V.Nalawade, J.)

2. Lakshmi Nagdev v/s Jitendra Kumar Nagadev [(2005) 1-HLR

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
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top