In matrimonial transfer applications, the convenience of the wife is the paramount consideration, particularly when she is caring for minor children and lacks independent financial means, to avoid undue hardship and multiplicity of proceedings.

Order

05/02/2026

1. None appears for the respondent.

2. The present transfer application has been filed with an

averment that an FIR was lodged by the applicant at Police

Station, Gogunda, Udaipur on 24.01.2024 for offences under

Sections 498-A , 406 and 323 IPC. An application under Section

125, Cr.P.C. was also filed by her before Additional Chief Judicial

Magistrate, Gogunda, District Udaipur.

3. Because of the above proceedings undertaken by the

applicant-wife, the non-applicant-husband, just to harass the

applicant, filed an application under Section 13 of the Hindu

Marriage Act, 1955 before the Family Court, Merta.

(Uploaded on 11/03/2026 at 11:56:22 AM)

(Downloaded on 19/03/2026 at 07:45:09 AM)

[2026:RJ-JD:6688] (2 of 4) [CTA-236/2025]

4. Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is having

two minor children and due to the financial constraints, she would

not be able to attend the proceedings at Merta.

5. It has therefore been prayed that the application pending

before the Family Court, Merta be transferred to Additional Chief

Judicial Magistrate, Gogunda, District Udaipur

6. In Reena Bahri Vs. Ajay Bahri , (2002) 10 SCC 136

Hon’ble the Apex Court held as under:

“2. The wife has a child, approximately three years

old, with her in Bombay. She avers that she has

no source of income and no one to travel with her

from Bombay to Delhi. In the circumstances, she

is unable to satisfactorily defend the divorce

petition. It is contended on behalf of the husband

that the transfer petition should be dismissed, and

that he will pay for the wife’s transport between

Bombay and Delhi along with an escort, whenever

required, as also pay for the travel of her

witnesses in the matrimonial proceedings.

3. This misses two points. The first relevant

circumstance is that there is a very small child

with the wife in Bombay and the second is that the

wife does not have anybody who can conveniently

accompany her to Delhi. Apart from this, as is

shown by the counter, there are already

proceedings in Bombay which the husband has to

defend. We think, in the circumstances, that the

transfer petition should be allowed.”

7. A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the the recent case of

Arushi Jain Vs. Himanshu Choradia , S.B. Civil Transfer Appl.

No. 309/2024 (decided on 29.10.2025) reiterated that the

(Uploaded on 11/03/2026 at 11:56:22 AM)

(Downloaded on 19/03/2026 at 07:45:09 AM)

[2026:RJ-JD:6688] (3 of 4) [CTA-236/2025]

convenience of wife should be given paramount consideration

while deciding transfer applications and hence, held it expedient in

the ends of justice to transfer the subject matrimonial proceedings

to a Court convenient to her residence. Therein, it was observed

as under:-

“11. Admittedly, the wife is presently living with her

minor son, Charvik, at Udaipur in her parental house.

No material has been placed on record to indicate that

she has any independent source of income. The

presumption, therefore, would be that she is

dependent upon her parents to meet her day-to-day

expenses, travel and litigation expenses in defending

the cases pending at Nimbahera which is

approximately 1.5 to 2 hours’ drive from Udaipur.

Cases between the parties are pending at both

Nimbahera and Udaipur.

The husband is presently posted at Mumbai and

attends court proceedings at both places i.e.

Nimbahera and Udaipur by travelling from Mumbai. It

is observed that there is a direct train from Mumbai to

Udaipur, which, being a major city and medical hub of

Rajasthan, also has better facilities for the treatment of

his ailing mother.

……

13. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, in “Mona

Arnesh Goyal vs. Arnesh