IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK

TRPCRL No.45 of 2025

Alok Kumar Pani ….... Petitioner

-Versus-

Namita Panigrahi ....... Opposite Party

TRP(C) No.176 of 2024

Namita Panigrahi ….... Petitioner

-Versus-

Alok Kumar Pani ....... Opposite Party

Advocate for the parties

For Petitioner : Mr. P.K. Mohanty

(In TRPCRL No.45 of 2025) Advocate

For Petitioner : Mr. A. Kamal

(In TRPCRL No.176 of 2025) Advocate

For Opposite Party : Mr. B. Jena

(In TRPCRL No.45 of 2025) Advocate

For Opposite Party : Mr. P.K. Mohanty

(In TRPCRL No.176 of 2025) Advocate

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

CORAM: JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA

Date of Hearing & Judgment :16.10.2025

_____________________________________________________________

S.K. MISHRA, J.

1. TRPCRL No.45 of 2025 has been preferred by the Petitioner-Husband for transfer of proceeding in Cr.P. No.52 of 2024 filed by the Opposite Party-wife under section 125 Cr.P.C. for maintenance, now pending in the Court of learned Judge, Family Court, Jajpur, to the Court of learned Judge, Family Court, Cuttack on the grounds detailed in the transfer petition.

2. Similarly, TRP(C) No.176 of 2024 has been filed by the Petitioner-Wife for transfer of C.P. No. No.858 of 2023 filed by the Opposite Party-Husband under section 12 (1) (a) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for divorce, now pending in the Court of learned Judge, Family Court, Cuttack, to the Court of learned Judge, Family Court, Jajpur.

3. The issue involved in both the transfer petitions so also parties to both the transfer petitions being same, both the transfer petitions on board are taken up together for hearing and disposal vide this common judgment.

4. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

5. During hearing, learned Counsel for the Petitioner-wife in TRP(C) No.176 of 2024 submits, as per the instruction received from the local Counsel, who represents the present Petitioner in Cr.P. 52 of 2024 before the learned judge, Family Court Jajpur, the said case was posted to today. Both the Opposite Party- Husband so also his father have already deposed as witnesses in the said case. The matter is ready for argument.

6. Reiterating the grounds urged in TRP(C) No.176 of 2024, learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner-wife is a deserted lady having no source of income. After her desertion, she is dependent on her father and leading a very miserable life. The distance between Jajpur to Cuttack is around 70 K.M.s and it would be difficult on her part to travel such a long distance to attend the Court proceeding on each and every date. That apart, there is no male member in her family to accompany her, excepting her old father.

7. Mr. Mohanty, learned Counsel for the Opposite Party- Husband (Petitioner in TRPCRL No.45 of 2025) submits, as per the instruction received from his client, he has no objection to such prayer for transfer.

8. Since the Opposite Party-Husband, who is the Petitioner in TRPCRL No.45 of 2025, has already appeared in Cr.P. No.52 of 2024 and participated in the said proceeding before the Court of learned Judge, Family Court, Jajpur and the said case is at the verge of conclusion, this Court is of the view that it would be convenient for both the parties, if the proceeding in C.P. No.858 of 2023 is transferred to the Court of learned Judge, Family Court, Jajpur.

9. Law is well settled that, while dealing with the application for transfer of matrimonial cases, the Court has to examine various factors and most important factor is the convenience of wife.

10. At this juncture, it would be apt to deal with the Judgment of the Supreme Court reported in 2022 SCC Online SC 1199 (N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs. A.S. Saravana Karthik Sha), wherein it is held as follows:-

“8. It is not disputed that the appellant is the resident of Chennai and that the appellant’s husband-respondent herein is the resident of Vellore and he is employed. The appellant who is 21 years old does not have any source of income of her own as she is not employed and is totally dependent on her parents for her livel