Judgment · High Court
Case at a glance
- Bench
- PHALKE
Outcome
Allowed
Accordingly, I proceed to pass following order:ORDER(i)The application is allowed
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 44. After hearing both the sides and on perusal of the record, it reveals that the non-applicant is already attending the criminal proceeding which ispending before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Katol therefore, no inconvenience would be caused to him if he attended the proceeding…
Judgment
9.mca.554.2024IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYNAGPUR BENCH : NAGPURMISC. CIVIL APPLICATION (Tr.) NO.554 OF 2024 Seema @ Vaishali w/o Sachin Wankhede (Maiden name Ku. Seema d/oGaneshrao Baviskar) and anotherVs.Sachin @ Pawan s/o Baburao Wankhede --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Mr. J. D. Bastian, Counsel for the applicants. Mr. S. B. Kakade, Counsel for the non-applicant. CORAM :URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J. DATED : 22/01/20251.By this application, the applicant is seeking transfer of the matrimonial proceeding i.e. HinduMarriage Petition No.476/2023 pending in the Courtof 5th Joint Civil Judge Senior Division, Amravati to the Civil Judge Senior Division, Nagpur.
Learned Counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is the wife of thenon-applicant and they married on 12.05.2018, but there was some discord between them and therefore, the applicant constrained to leave at her parents house and thereafter, she filed an application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedurebearing Criminal M. A. No.158/2020 which is pending before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Katol. Hesubmitted that the said proceeding is already (2) 9.mca.554.2024attended by the non-applicant. Now the HinduMarriage Petition is filed by the non-applicant in the Court of 5th Joint Civil Judge Senior Division, Amravatibearing H.M.P. No. 476/2023. The distance between Nagpur to Amravati is more than 150 Km. It is inconvenient for the applicant to attend the proceeding. She has no source to incur the expensesand for all the above grounds, the application deserves to be allowed.
Learned Counsel for the non-applicantstrongly opposed the said application and submitted that the distance is not too much which would cause the inconvenience to the present applicant. Hesubmitted that there is no sufficient and reasonable cause for seeking the transfer of the application. Inview of that, the application deserves to be rejected.
Operative part
After hearing both the sides and on perusal of the record, it reveals that the non-applicant is already attending the criminal proceeding which ispending before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Katol therefore, no inconvenience would be caused to him if he attended the proceeding before the CivilJudge Senior Division, Nagpur. In view of that, the applicant has made out a case for transfer of the matrimonial proceeding which is pending in the 5thJoint Civil Judge Senior Division, Amravati. (3) 9.mca.554.20245.Moreover, the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs. A.S. SaravanaKarthik Sha reported in AIR 2022 SC 4318wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court held that
Thecardinal principle for exercise of power under Section24 of the Code of Civil Procedure is that the ends of justice should 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 both the parties, the social strata of the spouses and their behavioural pattern, their standard of life prior to the marriage and subsequent thereto and the circumstances of both the parties in eking out their livelihood and under whose protective umbrella they are seeking their sustenance to life. Given the prevailingsocio-economic paradigm in the Indian society, generally, it is the wife’s convenience which must be looked at while considering transfer.
6. In view of the judgment of the Hon’bleApex Court, the application deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, I proceed to pass following order:ORDER(i)The application is allowed. (ii)The matrimonial proceeding H.M.P.No.476/2023 pending on the file of 5th Joint CivilJudge Senior Division, Amravati is hereby (4) 9.mca.554.2024withdrawn and transferred to the Civil JudgeSenior Division, Nagpur. (iii)Both parties shall appear before the Civil Judge Senior Division, Nagpur on06.02.2025.The application is disposed of. (URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.)Sarkate
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, I proceed to pass following order:ORDER(i)The application is allowed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 125; 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.