SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Raj) 8554

HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
REKHA BORANA
NEHA – Appellant
Versus
MAYANK GUPTA – Respondent
CTA / 180 / 2024



[2026:RJ-JD:7109]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Transfer Application No. 180/2024 Neha W/o Mayank Gupta, Aged About 32 Years, D/o Shri Krishan Kumar Rajgaria, R/o D-302, Daisy Tower, Shankara Residency Omex City, Ajmer Road, Dist. Jaipur (Raj.)

----Petitioner Versus Mayank Gupta S/o Shri Surendra Kumar Gupta, Aged About 36 Years, R/o 7 B 15 Pawanpuri, South Extension, Dist. Bikaner (Raj.)

----Respondent Connected With S.B. Civil Transfer Application No. 12/2025 Smt. Lalita W/o Shri Khushal Soni, Aged About 20 Years, D/o Shri Om Prakash R/o Sunaro Ka Vaas Asotara District Barmer Rajasthan ----Petitioner Versus Khushal Soni S/o Shri Ghanshyam Soni, Aged About 21 Years, R/o 301 Vardhman Nagar-A Fauji Area Ke Samne Vardhman Nagar Ajmer Road Jaipur Rajasthan ----Respondent S.B. Civil Transfer Application No. 161/2025 Dhiraj Kanwar Spouse/o Mahesh Pratap Singh, Aged About 27 Years, D/o Prahlad Singh, Resident Of 218/8, Pahad Ganj Second, Lal Sagar Road, Jodhpur, At Present Near Jain Mata Temple, Near Agarwal College, Merta City, District Nagaur (Rajasthan)

----Petitioner Versus Mahesh Pratap Singh S/o Himmat Singh, Aged About 28 Years, Resident Of 218/8, Pahad Ganj Second, Lal Sagar Road, Jodhpur, (Rajasthan)

----Respondent S.B. Civil Transfer Application No. 209/2025 Pallavi W/o Kuldeep Chaturvedi, Aged About 33 Years, D/o Shri Late Shri Vasudev R/o Welcom Ji Ka Makan, Motor Garage, Prem Nagar, Badke Balaji, Tehsil And District Jhalawar (Raj)

----Petitioner Versus Kuldeep Chatruvedi S/o Shri Kedarnath Chaturvedi, Aged About 41 Years, R/o Mishro Ji Ke Pepli, Police Station Chandoriya, Tehsil And District Chittorgarh (Raj)

----Respondent S.B. Civil Transfer Application No. 238/2025 Deepika Singariya W/o Ishwar Chouchan, Aged About 36 Years, D/o Madanlal Singariya R/o Sanjay Colony In Front Of Royal Garden Ratakhet Rampura Road District Udaipur ----Petitioner Versus Ishwar Chouchan S/o Deviram Chouchan, Aged About 39 Years, Saint Ravidas Colony Gingoli Road Tehsil Prabatsar District Didwana Kuchaman ----Respondent S.B. Civil Transfer Application No. 248/2025 Shivani W/o Vikas Khatri, Aged About 32 Years, D/o Vedprakash Chhabra R/o Ward No 4 Chandni Chowk Purani Abadi Sri Ganganagar ----Petitioner Versus Vikas Khatri S/o Jagdish Khatri, Aged About 39 Years, House No. 849 Near Khairpur Bhawan Kamla Colony Bikaner ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Falgun Buch (in TA No. 180/24)

Mr. Bajrang Singh (in TA No. 12/25)

Mr. D.S. Shekhawat (in TA No.

161/25)

Mr. Vaibhav Bang with Ms. Muskan Jangid (in TA No. 209/25)

Mr. Mahipal Singh Charan (in TA No.

238/25)

Mr. Jayant Garg (in TA No. 248/25)

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Bharat Shrimali (in TA No.

238/25)

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA

Order

09/02/2026

1. As all these transfer applications arise out of similar circumstances and involve common questions of law, they are being decided by this common order.

2. All the petitions have been preferred by the petitioner–wife seeking transfer of proceedings instituted by the respondent–husband under various provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 to the Court within whose jurisdiction the petitioner–wife is presently residing/working.

3. The petitioners in the respective applications have invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, praying that the various proceedings pending before different Courts be transferred to the place of their residence/workplace. Although the factual matrix in each petition varies, the grounds raised by the Petitioner wives are substantially common and relate to the hardships faced by them in attending proceedings at distant forums.

4. In all the present petitions, service upon the respondents stand duly complete. However, despite completion of service, none has appeared on behalf of the respondents in CTA Nos. 180/24, 12/25, 161/25, 209/25 and 248/25.

5. In some of the petitions, it has been urged that the petitioner- wife, being a woman with minor child/children solel

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top