Sushwant Meshram v. Smt. Anupama Sharma, pending in the court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Mathu

2. Brief facts of the case are that applicant is a wife and opposite is a husband. Proceeding under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act, initiated at the instance of opposite party/husband is pending in the Family Court, Mathura. Hence, the instant transfer application for the following reliefs:- "It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow this application and transfer the Hindu Marriage Petition No. 960 of 2015 (Computer No. 0080236/2015), Sushwant Meshram v. Smt. Anupama Sharma, pending in the court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Mathura, under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, to the competent court at District Agra. It is further prayed that during the pendency of this application before this Hon'ble Court, the further proceedings of Hindu Marriage Petition No. 960 of 2015 (Computer No. 0080236/2015), Sushwant Meshram v. Smt. Anupama Sharma, pending in the court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Mathura, under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, may remain stayed till further orders and/or to pass such other and further order or direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case." 2 TACL No. 503 of 2021

3. This Court entertained the matter on 25.10.2021 and stayed the further proceeding of the case. In pursuance of the order dated

25.10.2021, pleadings have been exchanged between the parties. The order dated 25.10.2021 is quoted as under: "Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned counsel for the opposite party. During the course of hearing, it is contended by learned counsel for the parties that there are every likelihood that the parties may settle their dispute, therefore, the parties may be referred to the Mediation Centre of this Court. Under the circumstances, the dispute between the parties is referred to the Mediation Centre, Allahabad High Court. Issue notice to the opposite party fixing 10.11.2021 through CJM, concerned for appearance of the parties before the Mediation Centre of Allahabad High Court. It is expected that the mediation proceedings shall be concluded within two months by the Mediation Centre. List this matter in the Addl. Cause List on 3.1.2022 along with a report of the mediation proceedings. Till then the further proceedings of Hindu Marriage Petition No. 960 of 2015 (Computer No. 0080236 of 2015), (Sushwant Meshram Vs Smt Anupama Sharma) pending in the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Mathura shall remain stayed. "

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that in the light of the order of this Court dated 25.10.2021, parties appeared before the Mediation Centre of this Court but the dispute has not been amicably settled between the parties. It is further submitted that proceeding of case under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act initiated by the opposite party-husband should be transferred from Mathura to the competent court at Agra. He further placed paragraph Nos.21 to 25 of the affidavit filed in support of the instant transfer application in order to demonstrate that proceeding of case under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act should be transferred from Mathura to Agra. 3 TACL No. 503 of 2021

5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the opposite party submitted that no good ground is made out to transfer the proceeding under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, from Mathura to Agra. He further submitted that the proceeding under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act is pending before the court concerned since 2015, as such, appropriate direction be issued to the court concerned for the expeditious disposal of the pending proceeding under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act.

6. I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the records.

7. There is no dispute about the fact that proceeding under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act initiated by opposite party/husband is pending at Family Court, Mathura. There is also no dispute about the fact that the matter has not been amicably settled between the parties before the Mediation Centre of this Court.

8. In order to appreciate the controversy, perusal of paragraph nos.21 to 25 of the affidavit filed in support of the instant transfer application will be relevant which are as under:- "21. That, due to her illness and minor son behind her to look after, the applicant is not able to attend the proceedings at Mathura from Agra and considering the attitude of the Presiding Officer, Family Court, Mathura, she has no hope anymore to get justice from the Family Court at Mathura, hence it is in the interest of justice that the proceedings of Hindu Marriage Petition No. 960 of 2015 (Computer No. 0080236/2015), Sushwant Meshram v. Smt. Anupama Sharma, pending in the court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Mathura, under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, may be transferred to the competent court at District Agra, where the other proceedings initiated by the applicant in Case No. 455 of 2016under 125 Cr.P.C., Case No. 187 of 2019 under Section 125(3) Cr.P.C. and Case No. 1883 of 2019 under D.V. Act filed in August, 2018, are pending between the same parties i.e. the applicant and the opposite party.

22. That, the applicant has no means to bear the expenses and to attend 4 TACL No. 503 of 2021 the proceedings at Mathura and she has to look after her minor school going son living with her at Agra.

23. That, in the proceedings of Case No. 455 of 2016 under 125 Cr.P.C., Case No. 187 of 2019 under Section 125(3) Cr.P.C. and Case No. 1883 of 2019 under D.V. Act, the opposite party is doing pairvi at Agra and he would not face any difficulty if the proceedings of Hindu Marriage Petition No. 960 of 2015 at Mathura is transferred to the court of same jurisdiction at Agra.

24. That, the case under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act was filed by opposite party in 2015 when he was posted at Mathura. Now he has been transferred to Panipat and he can very well attend the proceedings of the case at Agra which is only 42 Kilometers away from the Refinery Mathura. Morever, the opposite party is already attending proceedings in three cases at Agra i.e. Case No. 455 of 2016 under 125 Cr.P.C., Case No. 187 of 2019 under Section 125(3) Cr.P.C. and Case No. 1883 of 2019 under D.V. Act, as such, the opposite party would not face any difficulty or extra expense in attending the proceedings of Hindu Marriage Petition No. 960 of 2015 under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act to be transferred at Agra.

25. That, it is, therefore, expedient in the interest of justice that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to transfer the Hindu Marriage Petition No. 960 of 2015 (Computer No. 0080236/2015), Sushwant Meshram v. Smt. Anupama Sharma, pending in the court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Mathura, under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, to the competent court at District Agra. It is further expedient in the interest of justice that further proceedings in Hindu Marriage Petition No. 960 of 2015 (Computer No. 0080236/2015), Sushwant Meshram v. Smt. Anupama Sharma, pending in the court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Mathura, under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, may remain stayed till further orders during the pendency of present transfer application in this Hon'ble Court, otherwise the applicant shall suffer irreparably."

9. Perusal of paragraphs Nos.21 to 25 of the affidavit filed in support of the instant application as quoted above demonstrate that prayer 5 TACL No. 503 of 2021 regarding transfer of the proceeding from Mathura to Agra at the instance of applicant/wife is genuine.

10. The Apex Court in the case reported in (2016) 14 Supreme Court Cases 356, Vaishali Shridhar Jagtap vs. Sridhar Vishwanath Jagtap has transferred the proceeding of divorce petition filed by husband to the place where wife reside. Paragraph nos.1 to 7 of the judgement rendered in Vaishali Shridhar Jagtap (supra) will be relevant for perusal, which are as under: "1. 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 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." 6 TACL No. 503 of 2021

11. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case as well as the ratio of law laid down by the Apex Court in Vaishali Shridhar Jagtap (supra), the instant transfer application is allowed. The proceeding of Marriage Petition No.960/2015 (Computer Case No.0080236/2015), Sushwant Meshram vs. Smt. Anupama Sharma, under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act, pending in the court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Mathura is transferred to Agra. The Family Court, Mathura is directed to transmit the record of the case to the Family Court at Agra forthwith. The Family Court, Agra is directed to conclude the aforementioned matrimonial proceeding to its logical conclusion as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of 3 months from the date of production of certified copy of this order, after affording opportunity of hearing to both the parties, in accordance with law. September 15, 2025 C.Prakash (Chandra Kumar Rai,J.) CHANDRA PRAKASH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

2. Brief facts of the case are that applicant is a wife and opposite is a husband. Proceeding under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act, initiated at the instance of opposite party/husband is pending in the Family Court, Mathura. Hence, the instant transfer application for the following reliefs:- "It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow this application and transfer the Hindu Marriage Petition No. 960 of 2015 (Computer No. 0080236/2015), Sushwant Meshram v. Smt. Anupama Sharma, pending in the court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Mathura, under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, to the competent court at District Agra. It is further prayed that during the pendency of this application before this Hon'ble Court, the further proceedings of Hindu Marriage Petition No. 960 of 2015 (Computer No. 0080236/2015), Sushwant Meshram v. Smt. Anupama Sharma, pending in the court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Mathura, under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, may remain stayed till further orders and/or to pass such other and further order or direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case." 2 TACL No. 503 of 2021

3. This Court entertained the matter on 25.10.2021 and stayed the further proceeding of the case. In pursuance of the order dated

25.10.2021, pleadings have been exchanged between the parties. The order dated 25.10.2021 is quoted as under: "Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned counsel for the opposite party. During the course of hearing, it is contended by learned counsel for the parties that there are every likelihood that the parties may settle their dispute, therefore, the parties may be referred to the Mediation Centre of this Court. Under the circumstances, the dispute between the parties is referred to the Mediation Centre, Allahabad High Court. Issue notice to the opposite party fixing 10.11.2021 through CJM, concerned for appearance of the parties before the Mediation Centre of Allahabad High Court. It is expected that the mediation proceedings shall be concluded within two months by the Mediation Centre. List this matter in the Addl. Cause List on 3.1.2022 along with a report of the mediation proceedings. Till then the further proceedings of Hindu Marriage Petition No. 960 of 2015 (Computer No. 0080236 of 2015), (Sushwant Meshram Vs Smt Anupama Sharma) pending in the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Mathura shall remain stayed. "

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that in the light of the order of this Court dated 25.10.2021, parties appeared before the Mediation Centre of this Court but the dispute has not been amicably settled between the parties. It is further submitted that proceeding of case under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act initiated by the opposite party-husband should be transferred from Mathura to the competent court at Agra. He further placed paragraph Nos.21 to 25 of the affidavit filed in support of the instant transfer application in order to demonstrate that proceeding of case under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act should be transferred from Mathura to Agra. 3 TACL No. 503 of 2021

5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the opposite party submitted that no good ground is made out to transfer the proceeding under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, from Mathura to Agra. He further submitted that the proceeding under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act is pending before the court concerned since 2015, as such, appropriate direction be issued to the court concerned for the expeditious disposal of the pending proceeding under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act.

6. I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the records.

7. There is no dispute about the fact that proceeding under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act initiated by opposite party/husband is pending at Family Court, Mathura. There is also no dispute about the fact that the matter has not been amicably settled between the parties before the Mediation Centre of this Court.

8. In order to appreciate the controversy, perusal of paragraph nos.21 to 25 of the affidavit filed in support of the instant transfer application will be relevant which are as under:- "21. That, due to her illness and minor son behind her to look after, the applicant is not able to attend the proceedings at Mathura from Agra and considering the attitude of the Presiding Officer, Family Court, Mathura, she has no hope anymore to get justice from the Family Court at Mathura, hence it is in the interest of justice that the proceedings of Hindu Marriage Petition No. 960 of 2015 (Computer No. 0080236/2015), Sushwant Meshram v. Smt. Anupama Sharma, pending in the court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Mathura, under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, may be transferred to the competent court at District Agra, where the other proceedings initiated by the applicant in Case No. 455 of 2016under 125 Cr.P.C., Case No. 187 of 2019 under Section 125(3) Cr.P.C. and Case No. 1883 of 2019 under D.V. Act filed in August, 2018, are pending between the same parties i.e. the applicant and the opposite party.

22. That, the applicant has no means to bear the expenses and to attend 4 TACL No. 503 of 2021 the proceedings at Mathura and she has to look after her minor school going son living with her at Agra.

23. That, in the proceedings of Case No. 455 of 2016 under 125 Cr.P.C., Case No. 187 of 2019 under Section 125(3) Cr.P.C. and Case No. 1883 of 2019 under D.V. Act, the opposite party is doing pairvi at Agra and he would not face any difficulty if the proceedings of Hindu Marriage Petition No. 960 of 2015 at Mathura is transferred to the court of same jurisdiction at Agra.

24. That, the case under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act was filed by opposite party in 2015 when he was posted at Mathura. Now he has been transferred to Panipat and he can very well attend the proceedings of the case at Agra which is only 42 Kilometers away from the Refinery Mathura. Morever, the opposite party is already attending proceedings in three cases at Agra i.e. Case No. 455 of 2016 under 125 Cr.P.C., Case No. 187 of 2019 under Section 125(3) Cr.P.C. and Case No. 1883 of 2019 under D.V. Act, as such, the opposite party would not face any difficulty or extra expense in attending the proceedings of Hindu Marriage Petition No. 960 of 2015 under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act to be transferred at Agra.

25. That, it is, therefore, expedient in the interest of justice that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to transfer the Hindu Marriage Petition No. 960 of 2015 (Computer No. 0080236/2015), Sushwant Meshram v. Smt. Anupama Sharma, pending in the court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Mathura, under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, to the competent court at District Agra. It is further expedient in the interest of justice that further proceedings in Hindu Marriage Petition No. 960 of 2015 (Computer No. 0080236/2015), Sushwant Meshram v. Smt. Anupama Sharma, pending in the court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Mathura, under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, may remain stayed till further orders during the pendency of present transfer application in this Hon'ble Court, otherwise the applicant shall suffer irreparably."

9. Perusal of paragraphs Nos.21 to 25 of the affidavit filed in support of the instant application as quoted above demonstrate that prayer 5 TACL No. 503 of 2021 regarding transfer of the proceeding from Mathura to Agra at the instance of applicant/wife is genuine.

10. The Apex Court in the case reported in (2016) 14 Supreme Court Cases 356, Vaishali Shridhar Jagtap vs. Sridhar Vishwanath Jagtap has transferred the proceeding of divorce petition filed by husband to the place where wife reside. Paragraph nos.1 to 7 of the judgement rendered in Vaishali Shridhar Jagtap (supra) will be relevant for perusal, which are as under: "1. 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 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." 6 TACL No. 503 of 2021

11. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case as well as the ratio of law laid down by the Apex Court in Vaishali Shridhar Jagtap (supra), the instant transfer application is allowed. The proceeding of Marriage Petition No.960/2015 (Computer Case No.0080236/2015), Sushwant Meshram vs. Smt. Anupama Sharma, under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act, pending in the court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Mathura is transferred to Agra. The Family Court, Mathura is directed to transmit the record of the case to the Family Court at Agra forthwith. The Family Court, Agra is directed to conclude the aforementioned matrimonial proceeding to its logical conclusion as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of 3 months from the date of production of certified copy of this order, after affording opportunity of hearing to both the parties, in accordance with law. September 15, 2025 C.Prakash (Chandra Kumar Rai,J.) CHANDRA PRAKASH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad