SMT. DAKSHAYINI G.P v. SUDEENDRA KUMAR

(BY SRI. SYED AMEER.,ADVOCATE [ABSENT]) THIS CIVIL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 24 OF THE CPC, PRAYING TO TRANSFER M.C. NO. 18/2023 PROCEEDINGS PENDING ON THE FILE OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT HUNSUR TO HONBLE CIVIL JUDGE AT VIRAJPET. AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THIS PETITION, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC:19159 CP No. 207 of 2023 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER This petition under Section 24 of CPC is filed by the petitioner-wife seeking for transfer of M.C.No.18/2023 filed by the respondent-husband pending on the file of Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Hunsur to the file of the Civil Judge, Virajpet.

#2. The petitioner is the legally wedded wife of the respondent and their marriage was solemnized on

22.06.2003 Umamaheshwari temple choultry, Gonikoppal, as per Hindu rites and customs. After marriage the petitioner was living in her matrimonial house. Out of their wedlock a daughter was born. After some time, as matrimonial disputes arose between the parties, the petitioner started living separately with her brother and daughter in Gonikoppal. Thereafter, the petitioner–wife filed Criminal Misc. Petition No.39/2023 before the Civil Judge, Virajpet under Section 12 of the Protection of Women under Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (for short, ‘DV Act’) - 3 - NC: 2024:KHC:19159 CP No. 207 of 2023 and the respondent-husband filed a divorce petition in M.C.No.18/2023 under Section 13(1)(ia) and (ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act before the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Hunsur. Since the petitioner is residing with her brother and daughter at Gonikoppal, she filed this petition for transfer of M.C.No.18/2023 filed by the respondent- husband to the file of Civil Judge, Virajpet.

#3. The learned counsel the petitioner-wife contended that after the matrimonial dispute the petitioner is residing with her brother and daughter at Gonikoppal. She filed a Criminal Misc. No.39/2023 before the Civil Judge, Virajpet under the DV Act against the respondent- husband. The respondent-husband filed a divorce petition in M.C.No.18/2023 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Hunsur. Hunsur is about 75 kms. from Gonikoppal and it is difficult for her to travel from Gonikoppal to Hunsur to attend the case and it causes more inconvenience to the petitioner. Hence, the learned counsel sought to allow the petition. - 4 - NC: 2024:KHC:19159 CP No. 207 of 2023

#4. When the matter was called in the morning session none appeared for the respondent. Even in the afternoon session also there is no representation on behalf of the respondent.

#5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. Perused the petition papers.

#6. It is not in dispute that the petitioner is the legally wedded wife of the respondent and their marriage was solemnized on 22.06.2003 at Umamaheshwari temple choultry, Gonikoppal, as per Hindu customs. After the marriage the petitioner was living in her matrimonial house. Out of wedlock, a daughter was born. After some time, since there was a difference of opinion between the parties, the petitioner started living separately with her brother and daughter at Gonikoppal. Thereafter, she filed Crl. Misc.No.39/2023 under Section 12 of DV Act and the respondent-husband filed M.C.No.18/2023 before the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Hunsur for divorce. Since the distance between Gonikoppal and Hunsur is about 75 kms., it is difficult for the petitioner to travel to - 5 - NC: 2024:KHC:19159 CP No. 207 of 2023 Nagamangala to prosecute the case. She is residing with her brother and daughter and there are no persons to accompany her to attend her case at Hunsur.

#7. This Court in the case Smt.M.V.Rekha v. Sri Sathya @ Suraj - ILR 2010 KAR 5407 at Paragraph No.15 held as hereunder: "The cardinal principle for exercise of power under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure is that ends of justice 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 either of the parties, the social strata of the spouses and behavioural pattern, their standard of life antecedent to marriage and subsequent thereon and the circumstances of either of the parties in eking out their livelihood and under whose protective umbrella they are seeking their sustenance to life. Generally, it is the wife's convenience that must be looked at while considering transfer. Further, when two proceedings in different Courts which raise common questions of fact - 6 - NC: 2024:KHC:19159 CP No. 207 of 2023 law and when the decisions are interdependent, it is desirable that they should be tried together by the same Judge to avoid multiplicity in trial of the same issues and conflict of decisions (See Smt. NandaKishori v. S.B.Shiua Prakash AIR 1993 Kar 87, Sumita Singh v. Kumar Sanjay Anr. MANU/SC/0936/2001:AIR 2002 SC 396 and Smt. Swarna Gouri v. Sri Vinayak Pujar MANU/KA/7130/2007 : ILR 2007 Kar 4561." (emphasis supplied)

#8. Therefore, taking note of the inconvenience as made out by the petitioner and the law laid down in the case of Smt.M.V.Rekha (supra), which provides that the convenience of the wife is an aspect that is to be taken note of while considering the transfer petitions, petition deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, the following order is passed: i) The petition is allowed. ii) The case in M.C.No.18/2023 on the file of Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Hunsur is hereby withdrawn and transferred to the file of Civil Judge, Virajpet. - 7 - NC: 2024:KHC:19159 CP No. 207 of 2023 iii) The transferor Court is hereby directed to transmit the entire records to the transferee court. iv) The transferee court, after hearing the parties is directed to dispose of the said case, as expeditiously as possible and in accordance with law. Sd/- JUDGE CM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 14