Smt. Suchi Sharma v. Aasheervad Sharma @ Toni
Case at a glance
Outcome
Allowed
transfer application is allowed
Provisions considered
Judgment
Applicant :- Smt. Suchi Sharma Opposite Party :- Aasheervad Sharma @ Toni Counsel for Applicant :- Manoj Vashisth Counsel for Opposite Party :- Ramesh Chandra Srivastava Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari,J. Case was called out in revised. Learned counsel for the applicant is present whereas Mr. Ramesh Chandra Srivastava, learned counsel for the opposite party is not present. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is wife of opposite party and residing at Meerut and opposite party no.2 has filed Case No. 437 of 2020 before Family Court, Shamli, which is around 60 kilometers away from District Meerut, therefore, it is very difficult for her to attend the Court proceedings at District Shamli on each date fixed and defend effectively. He next submitted that other proceedings i.e. under Sections 323, 498-A, under Domestic Violence Act and under Section 125 Cr.P.C. are also pending at District Meerut.
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.
Operative part
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 applicant and perused the record. From perusal of the record, it appears to be correct that other cases pending between the parties are at District Meerut. Therefore, under such facts and circumstances of the case, the transfer application is allowed. The proceeding of Case No. 437 of 2020 (Aasheervad Shamra vs. Smt. Suchi Sharma) is withdrawn from the Principal Judge, Family Court, Shamli. The Principal Judge, Family Court, Shamli is directed to transmit the record of Case No.
437 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 petition 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 :- 11.3.2022 Junaid Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: transfer application is allowed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 125; Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
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.