Order

1. By way of the instant transfer application, the petitioner-wife seeks transfer of Case No.168/2025, presently pending before the learned Family Court No.3, Bikaner (hereinafter referred to as “Court X”), to the Court of learned equivalent Court at Jaisalmer (hereinafter referred to as “Court Y”).

2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the respondent-husband has instituted proceedings under Section 13 Hindu Marriage Act before Court X. It is urged that the petitioner-wife is presently residing at Jaisalmer and is not in a position to undertake repeated travel to Bikaner for attending the proceedings on every date of hearing. It has further been contended that the distance between the two places is approximately 330 kilometres and repeated travel would cause grave inconvenience, financial hardship and avoidable physical and mental distress to the petitioner. It is, therefore, prayed that the aforesaid proceedings be transferred from Court X to Court Y in the interest of justice and convenience of the parties.

3. This Court has given its thoughtful consideration to the submissions advanced at the Bar. At the outset, this Court deems it appropriate to observe that issuance of notice in every matrimonial transfer petition and keeping such matters pending for years together, particularly where interim stay orders continue to operate meanwhile, seldom advances the cause of justice. The experience of this Court demonstrates that in a considerable number of matters, transfer petitions remain pending merely at the stage of service and completion of pleadings for two to three years. Such prolongation neither subserves the institutional interest of expeditious adjudication nor secures the welfare of litigating spouses already embroiled in matrimonial discord. Rather, it unnecessarily prolongs the agony of parties and delays substantive adjudication of the disputes inter se them.

4. This Court cannot be oblivious to the fact that where the circumstances emerging from the record unmistakably indicate that the balance of convenience overwhelmingly leans in favour of one forum and the governing judicial precedents also support such transfer, insistence upon prolonged procedural formalities would only defeat the very object sought to be achieved. When the ultimate outcome appears reasonably foreseeable in light of settled legal principles, deferring the matter for years merely for completion of service would amount to allowing procedure to overshadow justice itself.

5. This Court further notices that Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure confers wide and comprehensive powers upon the High Court to transfer proceedings either on an application of a party or even suo motu whenever the ends of justice so require. The provision is fundamentally intended to ensure that procedural mechanisms remain subservient to the larger cause of fair adjudication. The judicial system exists to facilitate access to justice and not to perpetuate procedural hardship. Thus, in the peculiar facts of the present case and in the overarching interest of justice, this Court considers it appropriate to decide the present transfer petition expeditiously instead of relegating the parties to prolonged procedural delays.

6. This Court is also conscious of the practical realities surrounding matrimonial litigations. In a large