Smt. Kavita v. Mukesh Kumar Arya

Applicant :- Smt. Kavita Opposite Party :- Mukesh Kumar Arya S/O Nand Kumar Arya Counsel for Applicant :- Sudarshan Singh Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari,J. Heard Sri Shashank Sharma, Advocate holding brief of Sri Sudarshan Singh, learned counsel for the applicant. As per office report dated 26.3.2022, notice was issued to opposite party by R.P.A.D. on 17..2.2022 fixing 28.3.2022, but undelivered cover has been received with the following endorsement; "Praptkarta kafi talash karne par nahi mila. Therefore, under such facts of the case, notice is treated to be sufficient. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is wife of opposite party and residing at Meerut and opposite party no.2 has filed Divorce Petition No. 637 of 2020 before Family Court, Bareilly, which is around 230 kilometers away from District Meerut, therefore, it is very difficult for her to attend the Court proceedings at District Bareilly on each date fixed and defend effectively. He further submitted that Apex Court as well as many other Courts have taken constant view that in such cases convenience of the wife has to be taken into consideration. In support of his contention, he has placed reliance upon the judgment of Apex Court, Punjab and Haryana High Court, Madras High Court and this Court in the cases of Sumita Singh Vs. Kumar Sanjay reported in 2001 LawSuit(SC) 363, Sweety Vs. Anuj Garg passed in T.A. No. 228 of 2014 decided on 11 August, 2015 and D. Kokila Vs. R. Dillibabu passed in Transfer C.M.P. No. 201 of 2016 decided on 4 October, 2016, Satyam Goyal vs. Principal Judge, Family Court Gonda and others passed in Application Nos. 93 & 119 of 2017 decided on 3.8.2018, Smt. Dipti Saxena Vs. Ashish Srivastava and another passed in Transfer Application (Civil) No. 567 of 2019 decided on 14.12.2020 and Swapnal Mishra vs. Saurabh Mishra passed in Transfer Application (Civil) Nos. 152 of 2019 & 111 of 2021 decided on 4.2.2022 respectively. Lastly, he submitted that recently this Court in the matter of Smt. Shakshi Agarwal vs. Sri Ashutosh Agarwal allowed the transfer Application filed by wife vide detailed judgment and order dated 4.2.2022 considering the different pronouncements made by the Apex Court as well as High Courts. I have considered the rival submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the records as well as judgments relied upon by the learned counsel for the applicant. Facts of the case are unrebutted and controversy involved in the present case is squarely covered by the judgments relied by the counsel for the applicant. Therefore, under such facts and circumstances of the case, the transfer application is allowed. The proceeding of Divorce Petition No. 637 of 2020 (Mukesh Kumar Arya vs. Kavita) is withdrawn from the Principal Judge, Family Court, Bareilly. Principal Judge, Family Court, Bareilly is directed to transmit the record of Divorce Petition No. 637 of 2020 to Principal Judge, Family Court, Meerut within 15 days from the date of production of certified copy of this order. Thereafter, endeavour shall be made to decide the aforesaid case maximum within a period of six months as provided in Section 21-B of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 by the Principal Judge, Family Court Meerut or other Additional Judge as per the Rules of the Family Court. Order Date :- 8.4.2022 Junaid Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad