IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO.112 OF 2006

Smt.Monali Ramesh Jadhav .. Applicant

versus

Haresh Nanikram Avtarmani .. Respondent

...

Ms.P.N. Diwan i/b Balkrishna D. Joshi for the

applicant.

CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J

CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J

CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J

DATED : 5th October 2006

DATED : 5th October 2006

DATED : 5th October 2006

P.C.:

P.C.:

P.C.:

Heard counsel for the applicant.

1. This application is filed for transfer of the

Miscellaneous Application no.3 of 2005 from the Family

Court, Bandra to the Family Court, Pune.

2. The applicant is a former wife of the

respondent. After the divorce, she has remarried and

the present application has been filed by her after the

remarriage.

3. The petitioner and the respondent filed a

consent Marriage Petition no.A-1524 of 2002 in the

Family Court at Bandra for divorce by mutual consent.

In the said petition, consent terms were filed between

the parties from 16th October 2004, regarding custody

of the son. Under the consent terms it was agreed that

the custody of the son would remain with the applicant

herein and the respondent husband would have a right to

access to the son on every Sunday and for one entire

weekend once in a month. According to the respondent,

the petitioner committed breach of the consent terms

and she intended to shift to Pune along with the son

making it impossible for the respondent to have access

to the son. He therefore filed Misc. Application

no.50 of 2005 in the Family Court Bandra for a

direction that the applicant should obey the consent

decree and should not shift their son from Bombay to

Pune. The present petition has been filed by the

petitioner wife for transfer of the said Miscellaneous

Application from the Family Court at Bombay to the

Family Court at Pune.

4. I am not inclined to entertain the application

for transfer for reasons more than one.

5. Firstly, the parties had chosen the Family

Court at Bandra as the forum of choice for their

marriage petition. The consent order was passed by the

Family Court at Bandra. It is the respondent’s case

that the applicant is intending to commit a breach of

the consent decree and shift to Pune thereby denying

the respondent access to the son. The directions can

obviously be given only by the Court which passed the

consent decree. i.e. the Family Court at Bandra.

6. The present proceedings are not matrimonial

proceedings and therefore the decision of the Supreme

Court about the convenience of the wife to be looked

into do not apply.

7. The applicant has remarried. The applicant is

therefore not a helpless woman who is unable to travel.

In fact, by the consent decree of the Family Court,