SMT. PAVITRA v. SRI. SUNIL KUMAR.B.D
Case at a glance
Outcome
Dismissed
In the result, the petition is dismissed
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 66. Admittedly, the distance from Mysuru Mandya is only 40 kilometres. Therefore, the petition is dismissed as devoid of merits. However, the Family Court is specifically directed not to insist upon her presence unless there is any requirement and she is at liberty to file…
Judgment
SMT. PAVITRA W/O SUNIL KUMAR B.D., AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS C/O SRI. CHIKKABORAIAH NO.10, ESHWARA NILAYA TUNGA ROAD, GURURAJA LAYOUT SIDDARTHANAGAR NAGAR MYSURU - 570 011. (BY SMT. BIRISHA R, ADVOCATE) AND: SRI. SUNIL KUMAR.B.D, S/O LATE B.M. DEVADAS AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS R/O HOSABUDANUR VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI, MANDYA TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 401 WORKING AS SRI.SUNIL KUMAR B.D PREFERRED RELATIONSHIP MANAGER RETAIL BRANCH BANKING HDFC BANK, NO. 144, 150 FT RING ROAD 22ND MAIN, AGRAHARA - 2 - NC: 2026:KHC:26759 CP No. 114 of 2026 HC-KAR HSR LAYOUT SECTOR-1 BENGALURU - 560 102. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. RAJESH GOWDA, ADVOCATE) THIS CP IS FILED UNDER SEC.24 OF CPC., PRAYING TO ISSUE/PASS AN ORDER/DIRECTION TO THE COURT OF HONBLE, PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, AT MANDYA TO TRANSFER THE MATRIMONIAL CASE FILED BY THE RESPONDENT AGAINST THE PETITIONER IN MC NO.42/2026 TO THE FAMILY COURT, MYSURU. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA ORAL ORDER Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the parties.
This transfer petition is filed by the petitioner/wife for transfer of M.C.No.42/2026 filed by the husband for restitution of conjugal rights before the Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM., Mandya, to the Principal Judge, Family Court, Mysuru. - 3 - NC: 2026:KHC:26759 CP No. 114 of 2026 HC-KAR
Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner is residing in Mysuru along with her minor children aged 10 and 6 years and also aged parents. Respondent/husband is working as a Relationship Manager in HDFC Bank in Bangalore. Petitioner is not working and earning. Children are studying in Mysuru.
Petitioner's counsel further stated that she is suffering from ill-health and filed documents to show that she is suffering from depression. The discharge summary of JSS Hospital, Mysuru, shows that she was admitted on
15.11.2025 and discharged on 21.11.2025.
Learned counsel for the respondent stated that he is residing in Bangalore and he filed this case in Mandya, which is at a distance of 102 kilometers from Bangalore, but from Mysuru to Mandya the distance is only 40 kilometers and the petitioner was residing with him till 2024 and he has paid school fees. Suddenly she left him with children and is residing in Mysuru. As such, he filed - 4 - NC: 2026:KHC:26759 CP No. 114 of 2026 HC-KAR restitution of conjugal rights. In the year 2026, the petitioner has also filed M.C.No.287/26 for maintenance in the Family Court at Mysuru.
Operative part
Admittedly, the distance from Mysuru Mandya is only 40 kilometres. Therefore, the petition is dismissed as devoid of merits. However, the Family Court is specifically directed not to insist upon her presence unless there is any requirement and she is at liberty to file an examination-in-chief affidavit and she can be cross- examined either through video conferencing or through counsel. Ordered accordingly. In the result, the petition is dismissed. Sd/- (P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE PSJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 2
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: In the result, the petition is dismissed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. 24.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.