The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK TRP(C). No.392 of 2024 Pallavi Panda ....... Petitioner Pravupada Panda ....... Opposite Party -Versus- For Petitioner : Mr. S.S. Pattnaik, Advocate For Opposite Party : Mr. P. Dash, Advocate ---------------------------- CORAM: JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date of Hearing & Judgment: 11.07.2025 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- S.K. MISHRA, J. This transfer petition has been filed by the Petitioner- wife for transfer of C.P. No.214 of 2023, pending in the Court of Judge, Family Court, Cuttack to the Court of Judge, Family Court, Berhampur, Ganjam on the grounds that after her desertions, she is staying with her old ailing parents at Berhampur. The distance from Berhampur to Cuttack is around 200 kms away, for which it would be difficult on her part to attend the said proceeding at Cuttack. 2. Opposing to such prayer for transfer, an objection has been filed by the Opposite Party-husband. It has been stated in TRP(C) No.392 of 2024 Page 1 of 8 the objection that the Petitioner-wife is getting maintenance of Rs.30,000/- per month since April, 2022, being so directed in Cr.P. No.300 of 2018, which stood disposed of on 19th April, 2022. She is enrolled under the three years LLB regular course with effect from the year 2023 in Utkal University Law College. The University Enrolment Number is 2301 for the L.L.B. course and the duration of the course is till 2026. It has also been stated that, being observed by this Court, the Petitioner has filed Written Statement in C.P. No.214 of 2023 before the Judge, Family Court, Cuttack on 15th January, 2025. 3. Further, it has been stated that, if the proceeding is transferred to the Judge, Family Court, Berhampur, Ganjam, it will seriously affect the Opposite Party as he has to travel from Agra (Uttar Pradesh) to the Court of Judge, Family Court, Berhampur, Ganjam. 4. It has been further stated that since the Petitioner is pursuing her studies at Bhubaneswar and staying in the address detailed in Para 6 of her Objection, the prayer for transfer of proceeding to Berhampur deserves rejection. 5. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner-wife, reiterating the grounds urged in the transfer petition, submits that law is well settled, while dealing with transfer application for transfer of TRP(C) No.392 of 2024 Page 2 of 8 matrimonial proceedings, convenience of the wife is the paramount consideration. Since, the Petitioner-wife is at present residing at Berhampur with her old and ailing parents, the prayer made in the transfer petition to transfer the proceeding to Berhampur deserves to be allowed. 6. Though no such ground has been urged in the transfer petition, learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits, the Petitioner has lodged an F.I.R. against the Opposite Party- husband so also her in-laws in connection with Berhampur Mahila P.S. Case No.254 of 2022, corresponding to G.R. Case No.3011 of 2022, which is now sub-judice before the Court of SDJM, Berhampur. 7. Per contra, learned Counsel for the Opposite Party- husband, drawing attention of this Court to the averments made in para 5 of the Rejoinder filed by the Petitioner-wife, in response to the objection filed by the Opposite Party-husband submits, that it has been admitted by the Petitioner that she is a student of three years LLB course at Utkal University Law College for the academic session 2023-2026 and she was staying at Flat No.A001, Kalinga Enclave, Bidyut Marg, Nayapalli, Bhubaneswar, Odisha, Pin-751012 for pursuing her studies. TRP(C) No.392 of 2024 Page 3 of 8 8. Learned Counsel for the Opposite Party-husband further submits that to mislead this Court, it has been falsely stated in the transfer petition that, because of the accident, which cause serious injury to the father of the Petitioner, she was compelled to return her native place at Berhampur. For appearance in the examination, minimum 70% attendance is a must and no explanation has been tendered in the Rejoinder as to how she could leave for Berhampur and whether she has been allowed by the University to remain absent, even though she has been enrolled as a regular student for three years LLB Course in Utkal University Law College. 9. Learned Counsel for the Opposite Party-husband further submits, at present his client is serving at Agra. Since the Petitioner is pursuing her studies at Bhubaneswar, if the proceeding is transferred to Bhubaneswar, it would be convenient for both his client so also the Petitioner-wife to attend the case at Bhubaneswar. 10. A query being made as to the proof of ailment of her
Legal Reasoning
In a recent judgment delivered by this Court in TRP(C) No.29 of 2024 (Itishree Pradhan Vs. Subrat Ranjan Kapa), it was observed as follows:- it seems the conduct of transfer petitions, she has “10. As the from Petitioner-wife, taking advantage of the leniency shown by the High Court so also Supreme Court that convenience of wife must be looked at while dealing with these applications for transfer of proceedings initiated by herself so also her husband at Jagatsinghpur, to the Court at Cuttack. It is a glaring example of misuse of leniency shown by the Courts while dealing with application for transfer of matrimonial proceedings at the instance of the wife. In Anindita Das Vs. Srijit Das, reported in 11. (2006) 9 Supreme Court Cases, the Supreme Court observed as follows:- filed taking advantage of “Even otherwise, it must be seen that at one stage this Court was showing leniency to ladies. But since then it has been found that a large number of transfer petitions are filed by women the leniency shown by this Court. On an average at least 10 to 15 transfer petitions are on board of each court is, on each admission day. therefore, clear that leniency of this Court the women.” is being misused by It 12. In view of the discussions made above, this Court is of the view that each transfer petition, even if it is filed by the Wife/Women for transfer of to be matrimonial proceedings, considered on its own merit.” required is 12. Admittedly, the Opposite Party-husband, who is at present serving as a Wing Commander in Indian Air Force, being TRP(C) No.392 of 2024 Page 5 of 8 ordered in Cr.P. No.300 of 2018, though has preferred RPFAM No.108 of 2022 before this Court, is paying maintenance of an amount of Rs.30,000/- per month to the Petitioner-wife since 14.09.2022, which is not disputed by the learned Counsel for the Petitioner-wife. 13. However, taking note of the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the parties so also the settled position of law and the admitted fact that the Petitioner-wife is being paid Rs.30,000/- per month towards her maintenance in terms of order passed in Cr.P. No.300 of 2018, this Court is of the view that interest of justice will be best served, if the proceeding in C.P No.214 of 2023 is transferred to the Court of Judge, Family Court, Bhubaneswar, instead of to the Court of Judge, Family Court Berhampur, Ganjam. 14. Accordingly, Judge Family Court, Cuttack is directed to transmit the case record in C.P. No.214 of 2023 to the Court of the Judge, Family Court, Bhubaneswar. On receiving the case record in C.P. No.214 of 2023, the Judge, Family Court, Bhubaneswar shall re-register the said case, if so required, and proceed further in accordance with law giving due opportunity to both the parties and shall try to conclude the said proceeding at TRP(C) No.392 of 2024 Page 6 of 8 the earliest, preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of case record in C.P No.214 of 2023. 15. The Petitioner-wife is admittedly prosecuting her LL.B. course as a regular student in Utkal University Law College for the academic session 2023-2026, but at present allegedly staying with her parents in Berhampur. The Opposite Party-husband is serving in Agra. Hence, as prayed by the learned Counsel for the parties, the Judge, Family Court, Bhubaneswar is requested to permit both parties to appear through virtual mode following the guidelines prescribed under the Orissa High Court Video Conferencing for Courts Rules, 2020. However, on the dates of effective hearing i.e. for examination and cross-examination of witnesses and other purposes, for which their presence may be required by the Court and if it is so ordered, the parties so also their witnesses shall remain physically present before the Judge, Family Court, Bhubaneswar. 16. After transmission of record, to avoid delay, the parties, either in person or through their Counsel, shall make a query with the Court of Judge, Family Court, Bhubaneswar to ascertain the date and purpose of posting of C.P. No.214 of 2023 and participate in the said proceeding. The parties are directed not to seek for unnecessary adjournments and cooperate with TRP(C) No.392 of 2024 Page 7 of 8 the Judge, Family Court, Bhubaneswar for early disposal of C.P. No.214 of 2023. 17. With the said observation and direction, the Transfer
Arguments
father and mother, learned Counsel for the Petitioner-wife prays for an adjournment to file an Additional Affidavit. However, this Court is not inclined to grant further time at this juncture, as TRP(C) No.392 of 2024 Page 4 of 8 such documents could have been annexed to the Rejoinder to substantiate the pleadings urged there. 11.
Decision
Petition stands disposed of. 18. Interim order dated 12.12.2024 passed in I.A. No.413 of 2024 stands vacated. 19. Office is directed to communicate a copy of this order to the Court of Judge, Family Court, Cuttack so also the Court of Judge, Family Court, Bhubaneswar for compliance. 20. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application as per rules. ….…….…………… S.K. Mishra, J. Orissa High Court, Cuttack. Dated, 11th July, 2025/ Mona Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: MONALISA SWAIN Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 15-Jul-2025 11:10:01 TRP(C) No.392 of 2024 Page 8 of 8