In matrimonial transfer petitions, the convenience of the wife is generally the primary consideration, especially where she is financially dependent, residing far from the court, or facing comparative hardship in traveling.

Order

10/04/2026

1. The present transfer petition has been filed with a request for transferring Case No.268/2021 (Shyam Sunder Vs. Pinki Rajpurohit) under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act of 1955’) pending before Family Court No.2, Bikaner to Family Court, Balotra.

2. It has been submitted that the petitioner is residing at Barmer with her father and would face serious hardship if she is required to travel to Bikaner on each date of hearing. Further, the criminal proceedings pending qua the FIR as lodged by her are also pending at Pachpadra/Balotra.

3. It has further been averred that earlier, the respondent obtained an exparte decree of divorce by manipulating the service of notice on the petitioner. However, the said decree stood set aside on application under Order 9 Rule 13, CPC filed by the petitioner been allowed vide order dated 23.04.2025.

4. Per contra, Counsel for the respondent submits that the mother of the respondent is suffering with cancer and hence, it is the respondent who would be suffering comparative hardship in travelling from Bikaner to Balotra.

5. Heard the counsels. Perused the record.

6. It is a well-settled proposition of law that in matrimonial matters generally, it is the wife's convenience which must be looked at while considering the plea of transfer. In N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs. A.S. Saravana Karthik Sha , (2022 INSC 1310) (decided on 18.07.2022), the Hon’ble Apex Court held as under:

“9. The cardinal principle for exercise of power under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure is that the ends of justice should demand the transfer of the suit, appeal or other proceeding. In matrimonial matters, wherever Courts are called upon to consider the plea of transfer, the Courts have to take into consideration the economic soundness of both the parties, the social strata of the spouses and their behavioural pattern, their standard of life prior to the marriage and subsequent thereto and the circumstances of both the parties in eking out their livelihood and under whose protective umbrella they are seeking their sustenance to life. Given the prevailing socio-economic paradigm in the Indian society, generally, it is the wife's convenience which must be looked at while considering transfer.”

7. So far as the fact of the respondent’s mother suffering from any disease is concerned, neither any reply to the present petition has been filed nor any document to substantiate the averment has been placed on record. Further, perusal of order dated 23.04.2025 passed by Family Court on application under Order 9 Rule 13, CPC as filed by the petitioner reflects that despite the petitioner residing with the respondent at her matrimonial house at that point of time, the petition under Section 13 of the Act of 1955 was filed and even got decreed ex parte.

8. In that view of the matter, the petition pending at Bikaner deserves to be transferred to the place where the petitioner is residing. The same is also essential in view of the fact that she is an unemployed person financially dependent on her father. Hon’ble the Apex Court in the case of Vaishali Shridhar Jagtap vs. Shridhar Vishwanath Jagtap , (2016 INSC 504) held as under:

“3. According to the Appellant, her mother is aged and it is difficult for her mother to accompany the Appellant for her travel to Mumbai. It is also stated that there are three criminal cases-one for maintenance, the second under the Prevention of Domestic Violence Act, 2005 and