Akash Kumar v. Sonika) filed by the

1. Heard Mr. Rajesh Kumar Pandey, counsel for the applicant.

2. Brief facts of the case are that proceeding under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act initiated at the instance of opposite party is pending before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Hapur.

3. The instant transfer application has been filed for following relief : "It is, therefore most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble court may graciously be pleased to transfer the Petition No. 642/2024 (Akash Kumar Versus Sonika) filed by the respondent (herein) under section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act before learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Hapur and same is pending before learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Hapur learned Principal Judge, Family Court Bulandshahar. It is further prayed to stay the further proceeding of Petition No. 642/2024 (Akash Kumar Versus Sonika) filed by the respondent (herein) under section 9 of Act Hindu Marriage Act before learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Hapur and same is pending before learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Hapur, otherwise the applicant (herein) shall suffer irreparable loss and injury."

4. A co-ordinate Bench of this Court taken the matter on 18.07.2025 and stayed the further proceedings of Case No.642 of 2024. 2 TACL No. 404 of 2025

5. In compliance of the order of this Court dated 18.07.2025, steps were taken by learned counsel for the applicant.

6. As per office report, service is sufficient upon opposite party.

7. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that proceeding initiated under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act by opposite party should be transferred from Hapur to Bulandshahar in view of averment made in paragraph nos.20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27 of the affidavit filed in support of the instant transfer application.

8. I have considered the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant and perused the record.

9. There is no dispute about the fact that proceeding under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act initiated at the instance of opposite party is pending before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Hapur.

10. In order to appreciate the controversy involved in the matter, perusal of paragraph nos.20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27 of the affidavit shall be relevant for perusal, which is as under : "20. That the disputed marriage certificate is fake, forged, fabricated, null, and void, and it holds no binding authority over the respondent.

21. That the applicant is unmarried and has never married the respondent. She has no relationship or connection whatsoever with the respondent. Therefore, the respondent has no legal right to file a claim of conjugal rights.

22. That as per Section 7 of the petition, this case does not fall within the judicial jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Court.

23. That the respondent's claim is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed.

24. That the distance between Hapur to Bulandshahar is very much and the applicant is an unemployed and simple girl.

25. That being a lady to travel early and early so long is very difficult. 3 TACL No. 404 of 2025

26. That the applicant having danger from the respondent and his associates, they may cause any serious injury with the applicant, in the way out of court.

27. That the applicant is not wife of respondent he has fraudulently filed the present case only to harass and humiliate the applicant and her family. "

11. Perusal of the averment made in affidavit as quoted above demonstrate that proceedings under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act should be transferred from Hapur to Bulandshahar as prayer for transfer of the pending proceeding is genuine.

12. There is no counter affidavit to the averment made in the affidavit filed in support of the instant transfer application, as such, there is no option except to decide the instant transfer application on the basis of averment made in the affidavit.

13. The Apex Court in the case reported in (2016) 14 Supreme Court Cases 356 Vaishali Shridhar Jagtap Vs. Shridhar Vishwanath Jagtap has transferred the proceeding of divorce petition filed by husband to the place where wife reside. Paragraph No.1 to 7 of the judgment rendered in Vaishali Shridhar Jagtap (Supra) will be relevant for perusal which are as under :- "Leave granted.

2. The appellant is the wife of the respondent. She is aggrieved since the High Court of Bombay declined to transfer the case, filed in Mumbai by the respondent for divorce, to Barshi where the appellant resides- parental home. The Review Petition was also dismissed. The High Court has taken the view that the appellant does not have to travel on all days for defending the case, and on the days of her travel, she will be paid a sum of rupees one thousand five hundred.

3. According to the appellant, her mother is aged and it is difficult for her mother to accompany the appellant for her travel to Mumbai. It is also stated that there are three criminal cases - one for maintenance, the second under the Prevention of Domestic Violence Act, 2005 and 4 TACL No. 404 of 2025 the third under Section 498A of The Indian Penal Code, 1860 and other related provisions, pending at Barshi, and one on the civil side for restitution.

4. The learned Counsel appearing for the respondent has vehemently opposed the prayer for transfer. It was submitted that the appellant’s mother is only 60 years old and that she has two brothers. It is also pointed out that majority of the witnesses are from Mumbai and it would be difficult for them to travel to Barshi, and, in any case, the attempt is to harass the respondent-husband.

5. Admittedly, the distance between Mumbai and Barshi is around 400 kilometres. Four cases between the parties are pending at Barshi. Apparently, the comparative hardship is more to the appellant-wife. This aspect of the matter, unfortunately, the High Court has missed to take note of.

6. In view of the above, the impugned orders are set aside and the M. J.Petition No. 2287 of 2013 filed by the respondent-husband in Family Court Bandra, Bombay will stand transferred to the court of competent jurisdiction at Barshi.

7. The appeals are allowed as above. There shall be no orders as to costs."

14. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the instant transfer application is allowed. The proceeding of Case No.642 of 2024 under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act pending before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Hapur is transferred before the Family Court, Bulandshahar. Family Court Hapur is directed to transfer the record of Case No.642 of 2024 before the Family Court, Bulandshahar forthwith. Family Court, Bulandshahar shall decide the case No.642 of 2024 expeditiously preferably within a period of six months from the date of production of certified copy of this order. September 18, 2025 Priya (Chandra Kumar Rai,J.)

1. Heard Mr. Rajesh Kumar Pandey, counsel for the applicant.

2. Brief facts of the case are that proceeding under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act initiated at the instance of opposite party is pending before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Hapur.

3. The instant transfer application has been filed for following relief : "It is, therefore most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble court may graciously be pleased to transfer the Petition No. 642/2024 (Akash Kumar Versus Sonika) filed by the respondent (herein) under section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act before learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Hapur and same is pending before learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Hapur learned Principal Judge, Family Court Bulandshahar. It is further prayed to stay the further proceeding of Petition No. 642/2024 (Akash Kumar Versus Sonika) filed by the respondent (herein) under section 9 of Act Hindu Marriage Act before learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Hapur and same is pending before learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Hapur, otherwise the applicant (herein) shall suffer irreparable loss and injury."

4. A co-ordinate Bench of this Court taken the matter on 18.07.2025 and stayed the further proceedings of Case No.642 of 2024. 2 TACL No. 404 of 2025

5. In compliance of the order of this Court dated 18.07.2025, steps were taken by learned counsel for the applicant.

6. As per office report, service is sufficient upon opposite party.

7. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that proceeding initiated under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act by opposite party should be transferred from Hapur to Bulandshahar in view of averment made in paragraph nos.20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27 of the affidavit filed in support of the instant transfer application.

8. I have considered the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant and perused the record.

9. There is no dispute about the fact that proceeding under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act initiated at the instance of opposite party is pending before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Hapur.

10. In order to appreciate the controversy involved in the matter, perusal of paragraph nos.20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27 of the affidavit shall be relevant for perusal, which is as under : "20. That the disputed marriage certificate is fake, forged, fabricated, null, and void, and it holds no binding authority over the respondent.

21. That the applicant is unmarried and has never married the respondent. She has no relationship or connection whatsoever with the respondent. Therefore, the respondent has no legal right to file a claim of conjugal rights.

22. That as per Section 7 of the petition, this case does not fall within the judicial jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Court.

23. That the respondent's claim is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed.

24. That the distance between Hapur to Bulandshahar is very much and the applicant is an unemployed and simple girl.

25. That being a lady to travel early and early so long is very difficult. 3 TACL No. 404 of 2025

26. That the applicant having danger from the respondent and his associates, they may cause any serious injury with the applicant, in the way out of court.

27. That the applicant is not wife of respondent he has fraudulently filed the present case only to harass and humiliate the applicant and her family. "

11. Perusal of the averment made in affidavit as quoted above demonstrate that proceedings under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act should be transferred from Hapur to Bulandshahar as prayer for transfer of the pending proceeding is genuine.

12. There is no counter affidavit to the averment made in the affidavit filed in support of the instant transfer application, as such, there is no option except to decide the instant transfer application on the basis of averment made in the affidavit.

13. The Apex Court in the case reported in (2016) 14 Supreme Court Cases 356 Vaishali Shridhar Jagtap Vs. Shridhar Vishwanath Jagtap has transferred the proceeding of divorce petition filed by husband to the place where wife reside. Paragraph No.1 to 7 of the judgment rendered in Vaishali Shridhar Jagtap (Supra) will be relevant for perusal which are as under :- "Leave granted.

2. The appellant is the wife of the respondent. She is aggrieved since the High Court of Bombay declined to transfer the case, filed in Mumbai by the respondent for divorce, to Barshi where the appellant resides- parental home. The Review Petition was also dismissed. The High Court has taken the view that the appellant does not have to travel on all days for defending the case, and on the days of her travel, she will be paid a sum of rupees one thousand five hundred.

3. According to the appellant, her mother is aged and it is difficult for her mother to accompany the appellant for her travel to Mumbai. It is also stated that there are three criminal cases - one for maintenance, the second under the Prevention of Domestic Violence Act, 2005 and 4 TACL No. 404 of 2025 the third under Section 498A of The Indian Penal Code, 1860 and other related provisions, pending at Barshi, and one on the civil side for restitution.

4. The learned Counsel appearing for the respondent has vehemently opposed the prayer for transfer. It was submitted that the appellant’s mother is only 60 years old and that she has two brothers. It is also pointed out that majority of the witnesses are from Mumbai and it would be difficult for them to travel to Barshi, and, in any case, the attempt is to harass the respondent-husband.

5. Admittedly, the distance between Mumbai and Barshi is around 400 kilometres. Four cases between the parties are pending at Barshi. Apparently, the comparative hardship is more to the appellant-wife. This aspect of the matter, unfortunately, the High Court has missed to take note of.

6. In view of the above, the impugned orders are set aside and the M. J.Petition No. 2287 of 2013 filed by the respondent-husband in Family Court Bandra, Bombay will stand transferred to the court of competent jurisdiction at Barshi.

7. The appeals are allowed as above. There shall be no orders as to costs."

14. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the instant transfer application is allowed. The proceeding of Case No.642 of 2024 under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act pending before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Hapur is transferred before the Family Court, Bulandshahar. Family Court Hapur is directed to transfer the record of Case No.642 of 2024 before the Family Court, Bulandshahar forthwith. Family Court, Bulandshahar shall decide the case No.642 of 2024 expeditiously preferably within a period of six months from the date of production of certified copy of this order. September 18, 2025 Priya (Chandra Kumar Rai,J.)