Back
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
K.S. HEMALEKHA, J
SMT. NISCHITA .N @ PREKSHA – Appellant
Versus
SRI SHIVARANJAN K.J. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. transfer admittance based on travel hardship. (Para 4) |
| 2. wife's convenience is paramount in transfer decisions. (Para 5) |
| 3. judicial precedent reinforcing women's convenience in transfers. (Para 6) |
| 4. civil petition allowed with directives. (Para 7) |
ORAL ORDER
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is presently residing in Bengaluru and has instituted M.C.No.3332/2024 seeking dissolution of marriage, which is pending before the III Additional Family Court, Bengaluru. The travel distance between Bengaluru and Maddur is approximately 120 kilometers one way, and such long travel would cause undue hardship and great inconvenience to the petitioner in attending the proceedings instituted by the respondent-husband at Maddur. Furthermore, since the petitioner has already instituted a petition in Bengaluru, transferring the husband's petition to Bengaluru would also obviate the possibility of conflicting decisions.
6. The Apex Court in the case of N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs. A.S.Saravana Karthik Sha , [1Civil Appeal No.4894/2022](Aishwarya) has held that the ends of justice should demand the transfer and, gi
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
