[2025:RJ-JD:47618]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Transfer Appl. No. 55/2024 Muskan Alias Manisha Garg W/o Sh. Mahendra @ Mayank Kumar Garg, Aged About 30 Years, D/o Sh. Rajesh Kumar Garg, R/o C/o Kapil Tours And Travels, Old Bus Stand, Shambhupura, Tehsil And Dist. Chittorgarh.

----Petitioner Versus Mahendra Alias Mayank Kumar Garg S/o Sh. Bhawani Shankar Garg, Aged About 32 Years, R/o B-707, Vivekanand Nagar, Baba Dham Road, Ward No. 68, Bhilwara.

----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Dharmendra Singh Gaur For Respondent(s) : -

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR

Order

06/11/2025

1. The present transfer petition has been filed under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking transfer of Civil Original Case No.257/2023 titled as ‘Mahendra @ Mayank Kumar Vs. Smt. Muskan @ Manisha Garg’ filed by the respondent – husband under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 seeking dissolution of marriage between the parties which is pending adjudication before the learned Family Court No.1, Bhilwara to learned Judge, Family Court, Chittorgarh.

2. Heard.

3. The instant transfer petition is pending before this Court since 04.03.2024. This Court on 08.05.2025 while issuing notice to the respondent was pleased to stay the proceedings of Civil Original Case No.257/2023 pending before the learned Family Court No.1, Bhilwara. The office report indicates that the notices issued to the respondent – husband could not have been served upon him till date. This Court, however, keeping in view the entire facts and in the interest of justice, deems it just and proper to finally hear and decide the matter.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the marriage between the parties was solemnized on 06.02.2018 as per Hindu rites and rituals. Learned counsel further submitted that the proceedings were initiated by the respondent – husband under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 is a counter-blast to the proceedings initiated by the petitioner – wife under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. only with a view to harass the petitioner – wife. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner – wife is presently residing at Chittorgarh with her parents. The distance from Chittorgarh to Bhilwara is more than 60 kms and it would not be practically possible for the petitioner – wife to travel to Bhilwara on every date of hearing to contest her case.

5. It was thus, prayed by learned counsel for the petitioner – wife that the case pending before the learned Family Court No.1, Bhilwara may be transferred to the learned Family Court, Chittorgarh.

6. 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.

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

"24. General power of transfer and withdrawal:

(1) On the application of any of the parties and after notice to the parties and after hearing such of them as desired to be heard, or of its own motion without such notice, the High Court or the District Court may at any stage-

(a) transfer any sult, appeal or other proceeding pending before it for trial or disposal to any Court subordinate to it and competent to try or dispose of the same, or (b) withdraw any suit, appeal or other proceeding pending in any court subordinate to it; and (i) try or dispose of the same; or (ii) transfer the same for trial