No. 1171 of 2011 · Karnataka High Court
Case at a glance
- Bench
- BSJNDRAKALA
Provisions considered
Judgment
ORDER Under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure. the petitioner has filed the above petition seeking transfer of 0.5. No.1171/2011 pending disposal on the file of I Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.) Hubli, to the Family Court at Bijapur on whose ifie. Criminal Misc. No.353/2011 is pending disposal.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. The respondent though served, has remained absent.
On perusal cow of plaint In
0.S.No.1 171/2011 it Is seen that the same Is filed by the respondent herein against the petitioner seeking restitution of conjugal rights. 3
The leaned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the respondent preferred G&WC No.51/2011 on the file of the PrI. Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.), Hubli against the petitioner seeking appointing him as guardian anc9ustody of the minor children and the same was also transferred from the said Court at Hubli to Family Court at Bijapur by ailowing C.P No.225/2011 vlde Order dated 24.02.20 12 and on the same ground, this petition may also be transferred to the Family Court. Bijapur.
Admittedly. the petition filed by the respondent is for restitution of conjugal rights against the petitioner and so also admittedly. the petitioner residing within the jurisdiction of Family Court at Bijapur. Hence, to avoid Inconvenience and also as other proceedings between the same parties are already pending disposal on the ifie of the Family Court, Bijapur, to avoid divergent findings being given, it is appropriate that all the cases be posted to one and the same Court viz. Family Court at Biajpur. vouT.uajsuanpaojeTuoppadam‘A2upsooav (iwjsg)a$pnpajeuopvjoamamuoTTog/UIUON aseapa.uajsuatjaqjisoasndeETa‘pnoLITuIMamo;1qnH STpqojqauo‘Srpamesaq4uotrnoaaiajsuaqama.xo; aq pawodpumsMOU 01
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.