[2025:RJ-JD:48384]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Transfer Appl. No. 113/2024 Smt. Nidhi W/o Prashant, Aged About 36 Years, D/o Shyam Singh Sankhla, R/o Chattar Singh Ka Kachhwaha, Ashok Nagar Ke Bahaar Teesri Pol, Mahamandir, Jodhpur.

----Petitioner Versus Prashant S/o Chhaganlal, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Laxmi Nagar, Barmer, Tehsil Barmer, Dist. Barmer.

----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Siddharth Lalas For Respondent(s) : None Present HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR

Order

11/11/2025

1. The present transfer petition has been filed under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking transfer of the Application No.46/2024 filed by the respondent – husband under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 seeking divorce from the applicant which is pending for adjudication before the Court of learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, No.1, Barmer to learned Judge, Family Court Jodhpur.

2. This Court vide order dated 14.05.2025 send the matter to the Mediation Centre and directed both the parties to appear before the mediator.

3. As per the Mediation report dated 29.09.2025, the mediation proceedings could not be conducted as the applicant did not participate in the mediation process.

4. Despite due service of notice, the respondent has not appeared before this Court.

5. In these circumstances, and keeping in view the interest of justice, this Court deems it appropriate to proceed to finally hear and decided the matter.

6. Heard.

7. The instant transfer petition is pending before this Court since 10.05.2024. This Court on 02.08.2024 while issuing notice to the respondent was pleased to stay the further proceedings in Application No.46/2024 pending before the Court of learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, No.1, Barmer.

8. Learned counsel for the applicant - wife submitted that the marriage between the parties was solemnized on 22.11.2015 as per Hindu rites and rituals. After marriage, they were blessed with two daughters. Learned counsel further submitted that the proceedings were initiated by the respondent – husband under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. Learned counsel submitted that the respondent – husband had subjected applicant – wife to physical abuse, threatening her with divorce and expressing his intention to marry another woman. Further, applicant – wife contended that the respondent – husband would humiliate her for not giving birth to a son thereby causing immense physical and mental agony. Learned counsel also submitted that the applicant – wife is presently residing at Jodhpur in her parent’s house situated in Ashok Nagar outside Teesri Pol, Mahamandir, Jodhpur. The distance from Jodhpur to Barmer is around 200 kms and it would not be practically feasible for the applicant – wife to travel from Jodhpur to Barmer on each date of hearing as she is sole caretaker of her two minor daughters.

9. It was thus, prayed by learned counsel for the applicant – wife that the case pending before the Court of learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, No.1, Barmer may be transferred to the learned Judge, Family Court, Jodhpur.

10. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Sumita Singh Vs. Kumar Sanjay & Ors., reported in (2001) 10 SCC 41; Sarkar (Shome) Vs. Pradip Sarkar [Transfer Petition (Civil) No.622/2007 decided on 10.11.2008]; Manju Varma Vs. State of U.P. and Ors. [Civil Appeal No.8290/2002 decided on 17.11.2004] and Arti Rani @ Pinki Devi Vs. Dharmendra Kumar Gupta, reported in (2008) 9 SCC 353 was pleased to hold that the Courts are required to give more weight and consideration to the convenience of the female litigants and transfer of legal proceedings from one Court to another should ordinarily be allowed. Taking into consideration their convenience, the Court should desist from putting female litigants under undue hardship.

11. Section 24 of the CPC is reproduced herein below for ready reference:-

"24. General power of transfer and withdrawal:

(1) On the appl