IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK

TRP(C) No.190 of 2025 Kanchanshree Behera @

Bindhani ….... Petitioner

-Versus-

Pradeep Kumar Behera ....... Opposite Party

Advocate for the parties

For Petitioner : Mr. S.K. Patnaik,

Advocate

For Opposite Party : Ms. M. Mohanty,

Advocate

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

CORAM: JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA

Date of Hearing & Judgment: 31.10.2025

_____________________________________________________________

S.K. MISHRA, J.

1. This transfer petition has been filed by the Petitioner- wife for transfer of proceeding in C.P. No.649 of 2023, preferred by the Opposite Party-husband, now pending in the Court of learned Judge, Family Court, Balasore to the Court of learned Judge, Family Court, Baripada on the grounds detailed in the

Transfer Petition.

2. Though the Opposite Party-husband has appeared through Ms. M. Mohanty, learned Counsel, being engaged through the Legal Aid, no written objection has been filed till date opposing to the prayer for transfer. However, on consent of learned Counsel for the parties, the matter is taken up for hearing and disposal at the stage of admission, permitting the learned Counsel for the Opposite Party-husband to orally oppose to the prayer made 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, the Petitioner is a deserted lady. After her desertion, she is dependent on her parents, who are staying at Baripada. Apart from that, the distance from Baripada to Balasore would be around 60 KMs. It would be difficult on her part to attend the day to day proceeding at Balasore. Further, at her instance C.P. No.238 of 2023 filed under Section 13(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 so also G.M.C. No.32 of 2024 filed under Section 25 of Guardians & Wards Act, 1890 are also pending before the learned Judge, Family Court, Baripada, wherein , being noticed, the present Opposite Party-husband has appeared and is contesting the said case. He further submits, as per the settled position of law, the said proceedings should be tried together at Baripada, which will be just and proper to avoid the multiplicity of proceeding and conflicting of decisions. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner, relying on the judgment of the Supreme Court reported in 2022 SCC OnLine (SC) 1199 (N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs. A.S. Saravana Karthik Sha), submits that, while dealing with transfer petitions in matrimonial cases, convenience of the wife must be looked at.

5. Per contra, learned Counsel for the Opposite Party- husband submits, the Opposite Party is financially incapable to defend his case. He has already been compelled to appear before the Court at Baripada to defend two cases, initiated at the instance of the Petitioner-wife. That apart, the girl child, who is studying in Class-5, is staying with him at Balasore. He was serving as a Lecturer in a private college and has left the job. He is taking care of his minor girl child and there is no other member to look after her in his absence. She further submits, as per the instruction received, though the mother of the Opposite Party-husband was taking care of the child, now, she is no more and it will be difficult on his part to attend the day to day proceeding at Baripada with his daughter on each and every date of posting of the said case, if it is transferred to Baripada.

6. Admittedly, no applications have been moved by the Opposite Party-husband till date for transfer of proceedings in C.P. No.238 of 2023 filed under Section 13(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 so also G.M.C. No.32 of 2024 filed under Section 25 of Guardians & Wards Act, 1890, now pending in the Court of learned Judge, Family Court, Baripada, to Balasore on the grounds, as stated by the learned Counsel for the Opposite Party-husband.

7. Law is well settled that, while dealing with transfer petitions in matrimonial cases, convenience of the wife must be looked at and proceedings involving common qu