IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RATNESH CHANDRA SINGH BISEN

th

ON THE 15 OF OCTOBER, 2025 MISC. CIVIL CASE No. 3880 of 2025 SMT. VINEETA PATNI Versus DHARMENDRA PATNI Appearance:

Shri Dharmendra Patel - Advocate for appellant.

ORDER The applicant/wife has filed the present petition under Section 24 of C.P.C. making a prayer for transfer of case bearing No. RCS HMA 2715/2022 filed by respondent/husband under Section 13(A) of Hindu Marriage Act, which is pending before Principal Judge, Family Court, Indore to competent Court at Family Court Bhopal, but Registry of this Court has raised objection regarding maintainability of this petition on the question of territorial jurisdiction.

2. Counsel appearing for applicant placed reliance on the judgment/order passed by this Court in M.C.C. No.1335/2004 (Smt. Uma Devi Vs. Kamlesh) with regard to question of territorial jurisdiction.

3. Heard on the question of territorial jurisdiction.

4. On perusal of the application, it reveals that Case No. RCS HMA

2715/2022 is pending before the Family Court, Indore. As per Rule 4 of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh Rule, 2008, this petition ought to have filed before the High Court Bench at Indore. Rule 4 of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh Rule, 2008 is quoted as under:-

"Where a bench, in the Principal Seat at Jabalpur or the Benches at Indore or Gwalior, on an objection taken by the Registry or otherwise, is of the opinion that a main case posted before it, had arisen from a revenue district falling within the territorial jurisdiction of some other Bench or the Principal Seat, it may record its opinion and return the main case for its presentation at proper place for orders, after retaining one complete set of the main case."

5. According to aforesaid rule, this petition is maintainable at Indore Bench because Family Court, Indore come within territorial jurisdiction of Indore Bench and also in the judgment passed by this Court in the case of Shailey Vs. Pankaj Kumar Madne; 2012(4) M.P.L.J. Page-635, it has been held as under:-

"The Family Court of Bhopal comes under the territorial jurisdiction of the High Court of M.P. Principal Seat at Jabalpur, while the Family Court at Gwalior comes under the territorial jurisdiction of Bench of High Court at Gwalior and, therefore, in view of the provisions of Sections 23 and 24 of CPC read along with Rule of Chapter 3 of the M.P. High Court Rules, 2008, such transfer petition could not be entertained at Gwalior Bench of the High Court. The applicant has the remedy to approach the main seat at Jabalpur seeking transfer of the case, from Family court, Bhopal to Family Court, Gwalior."

5. In view of aforesaid law laid down by this Court on the basis of Rule 4 of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh Rules, 2008, applicant cannot get the benefit of judgment/order passed in case of Smt. Uma Devi (supra) because the said judgment/order is against the Rule 4 of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh Rules, 2008.

6 . Considering aforesaid, this MCC is dismissed with liberty to applicant to approach appropriate Bench having territorial jurisdiction to transfer the case.

(RATNESH CHANDRA SINGH BISEN)

JUDGE sp/-