IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK

TRP(C) No.77 of 2025

Subhasmita Swain @ Singh ….... Petitioner

-Versus-

Biraj Kumar Singh ....... Opposite Party

Advocate for the parties

For Petitioner : Mrs. Susamarani Sahoo,

Advocate

For Opposite Party : Mrs. Ashwariya Dash,

Advocate

...................

CORAM: JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA

Date of Hearing & Judgment: 20.08.2025

_____________________________________________________________

S.K. MISHRA, J.

1. Learned Counsel for Petitioner files the Mediation Report dated 18.07.2025 in the Court, wherein the learned Mediator has reported that the mediation became unsuccessful, which be kept on record. However, since the pleadings are complete, on consent of learned Counsel for the parties, the transfer petition is taken up for hearing and disposal at the stage

of admission.

2. This transfer petition has been filed by the Petitioner- wife for transfer of C.P No.251 of 2023 filed by the Opposite Party- husband, pending in the Court of learned Judge, Family Court, Khurda, to the Court of learned Judge, Family Court, Cuttack on the grounds detailed in the transfer petition.

3. Heard Learned Counsel for the parties.

4. Reiterating the grounds urged in the transfer petition, learned Counsel for the Petitioner-wife submits, after her desertion, she is leading a miserable life and staying with her parents at Cuttack. She has no source of income to maintain her livelihood and is totally dependent on her parents. She being a deserted lady having a minor girl, who is around 8 years, it would be difficult on her part to attend the day-to-day proceeding at Khurda, by travelling a long distance from Cuttack to Khurda. She also reasonably apprehends her life to be in danger, if she appears in the proceeding pending before the learned Judge, Family Court, Khurda, as she has been threatened by the Opposite Party-

husband and his relatives.

5. Opposite Party-husband has filed a Counter Affidavit opposing to such prayer for transfer. Learned Counsel for the Opposite Party, reiterating such objections submits, the Petitioner- wife has suppressed the fact that though the transfer petition was presented on 07.03.2025, she was set ex-parte on 05.03.2025 in C.P. No.251 of 2023. Thereafter, the matter was posted to 12.03.2025 for argument. However, on 06.03.2025, the Petitioner filed a petition to advance the date so also another petition to set aside the ex-parte order dated 05.03.2025 and the case stood adjourned to 12.03.2025 for consideration of said petitions. She further states that the Petitioner-wife appeared before the learned Court below on 12.03.2025 and participated in the hearing. The learned Judge, Family Court, Khurda allowed the petition filed by the Petitioner-wife and set aside the ex-parte order dated

05.03.2025 and the matter stood posted to 17.03.2025.

6. Law is well settled that in matrimonial proceeding convenience of the wife must be looked at. In N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs. A.S. Saravana Karthik Sha reported in 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1199, the Supreme Court held as follows:

“9. The cardinal principle for exercise of power under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure is that the ends of justice should demand the transfer of the suit, appeal or other proceeding. In matrimonial matters, wherever Courts are called upon to consider the plea of transfer, the Courts have to take into consideration the economic soundness of both the parties, the social strata of the spouses and their behavioural pattern, their standard of life prior to the marriage and subsequent thereto and the circumstances of both the parties in eking out their livelihood and under whose protective umbrella they are seeking their sustenance to life. Given the prevailing socio-economic paradigm in the Indian society, generally, it is the wife’s convenience which must be looked at while considering transfer.”

(Emphasis supplied)

7. After going through the pleadings on record so also taking note of the contentions made by the learned Counsel for the parties and t