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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Guj) 11266

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
Devan M. Desai, J
Shefaliben Parmar – Appellant
Versus
Pritesh Kiranbhai Parmar – Respondent
R/MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR TRANSFER) NO. 2514 of 2025 | C/MCA/2514/2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Medha N. Pandya
For the Respondents:

In applications for transfer of matrimonial proceedings under Section 24 of the CPC, the inconvenience of the wife, including travel distance and the care of minor children, is given significant weight in the exercise of the court's discretionary power.

Headnote:(A) Civil Procedure - Transfer of Proceedings - Section 24 of CPC - Transfer of matrimonial suit - Inconvenience of the wife, particularly when she has minor children and is dependent on aged parents, is a primary consideration for exercising the court's discretionary power to transfer proceedings. (Para 4, 6)

(B) Matrimonial Disputes - Restitution of Conjugal Rights - Transfer of case - The significant distance between the current court and the residence of the wife, coupled with existing proceedings in the desired court, justifies the transfer of the case to ensure the interest of justice. (Para 3, 4, 7)

Issues: Whether the proceedings of Family Suit No. 44 of 2025 should be transferred from the Family Court, Navsari to the Family Court, Dahod.

0.23553358487443876

FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN M. DESAI

Approved for Reporting Yes No ✓

ORAL JUDGMENT

1. By way of the present application under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as the “Code”), the applicant-wife seeks transfer of proceedings of Family Suit No.44 of 2025 filed by the respondent-husband pending before learned Family Court, Navsari to learned Family Court, Dahod.

2. Heard learned advocate Ms. Medha N. Pandya for the applicant-wife. Though served, none appeared for the respondent-husband.

3. Brief facts of the case are as under:-

3.1. The applicant wife got married to respondent husband on 26.11.2017 at Dahod as per Hindu rights and rituals. From the said wedlock, twin children were born out who are aged about 5 years. After some time of marriage, the respondent-husband as well as his family members started harassing the applicant-wife over petty things. Resultantly, parties got separated. The applicant-wife filed application being Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.159 of 2025 under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as “Cr.P.C.”) seeking maintenance for her as well as her two minor children before the learned Family Court, Dahod. The respondent- husband preferred Hindu Marriage Petition No.44 of 2025 for the restitution of conjugal rights under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) before learned Family Court, Navsari. Therefore, the applicant-wife has filed present application seeking transfer of the aforesaid petition filed by the respondent-husband.

4. Learned advocate for the applicant-wife has submitted that applicant-wife is staying with her parents at Dahod and has also initiated proceedings being Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.159 of 2025 under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C before the learned Family Court, Dahod for maintenance. It is further submitted that the respondent-husband filed Family Suit No.44 of 2025 for restitution of conjugal rights under Section 9 of the Act before learned Family Court, Navsari. It is further submitted that the distance between Dahod and Navsari is 318 kilometers one way. It is further submitted that the applicant-wife is dependent on her old aged parents and she is earning less than the earning of respondent-husband. It is further submitted that it would be difficult for the applicant-wife to attend Court proceedings at learned Family Court Navsari. Considering the twin children who are aged about 5 years as on today and in view of the facts of the case, request is made to transfer the proceedings of the Family Suit No.44 of 2025 filed by the respondent-husband pending before learned Family Court, Navsari to learned Family Court, Dahod. Except above, no other submissions are canvassed by learned advocate for the applicant.

5. I have considered the submissions made by learned advocate for the applicant and the averments made in the application and more particularly, non-challenge by respondent- husband, it would be in the interest of justice to transfer the proceedings of Family Suit No.44 of 2025 filed by the respondent-husband pending before learned Family Court, Navsari to learned Family Court, Dahod.

6. Further, it will not be out of place to refer the case of Sumita Singh Vs. Kumar Sanjay , AIR 2002 SC 396, wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court has observed that the wife’s inconvenience must be given due importance while deciding application under Section 24 of the Code. The power vested under Section 24 of the Code is a discretionary power and Court may or may not exercise such discretion. In the present case, the distance between Dahod and Navsari is approximately 318 kilometers one way, therefore, it will be difficult for applicant-wife to travel to attend the Court proceedings on each and every adjournment.

7. Under these circumstances, prayer made by the present applican

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top