Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2010 DIGILAW 251 (MP)

REKHA (SMT. ) @ RICHA DEWANI v. KAILASH DEWANI

2010-03-04

U.C.MAHESHWARI

body2010
Judgment U.C.Maheshwari, J. ( 1. ) This petition is preferred by the applicant/wife under section 24 read with section 151 of the CPC for transferring the Civil Original Suit No.77-A/09 filed by the respondent under section 13(1)(A) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 in the Court of IV th Addl. District Judge, Jabalpur, from such Court to the competent court at Bhopal where the applicant is residing with her infant baby. ( 2. ) Although, this petition is preferred for transferring the case by mentioning so many grounds , out of them, according to para-7 of the petition the applicant is having an infant baby in her lap who was born on 26.10.08. As per further averments, she is residing with her in her parental home at Bhopal under the compelling circumstances created by the non-applicant. As per other grounds, she did not have any source of earning to meet the expenses and she is fully dependent on her 80 years old father who is running a flour mill. In such premises, it is also stated that she herself or her father are not in a position to meet the expenses for attending and contesting the case at Jabalpur. The ground regarding distance of Jabalpur to Bhopal i.e 300 Km is also taken and it is stated that it is not possible for her to come with an infant baby for attending the case as no any other person is available to come with her to contest the aforesaid matter at Jabalpur. The petition is also supported by an affidavit of the applicant. ( 3. ) In reply of the respondent, the grounds of the petition stated by the applicant are denied. In addition it is stated that if applicant comes to attend . the case at Jabalpur then respondent is ready and willing to pay the expenses for the same and, in such premises, prayer for dismissal of the petition is made. ( 4. ) The applicants counsel by referring the facts stated in the petition argued that the applicant being woman having an infant baby in lap, her convenience should be considered with liberal approach and, insuch premises, prayed for transfer of the case from Jabalpur to Bhopal. ( 5. ( 4. ) The applicants counsel by referring the facts stated in the petition argued that the applicant being woman having an infant baby in lap, her convenience should be considered with liberal approach and, insuch premises, prayed for transfer of the case from Jabalpur to Bhopal. ( 5. ) The aforesaid prayer is opposed by the respondents counsel by referring the averments of the reply and also said that respondent is ready and willing to afford the expenses and, in such premises, in view of the decision of this Court in the matter of Deepak Kuttapan Vs. Anil Anil Rajan-2007(2)MPLJ-377 and in the matter of Rakhi Mishra Vs. Sanjay Mishra-2001(2) MPLJ-269 prayed for dismissal of the petition. ( 6. ) Having heard, keeping in view the arguments, after perusing the papers placed on the record and also the aforesaid cited cases, I am of the considered view that the present petition deserves to be allowed. In the present matter, the applicant is residing with her infant baby aged nearabout 154 years with her father and as per the case of the applicant her father is 80 years old and there is no any other in the family who can come with her to Jabalpur for contesting the aforesaid matter. .Such averments are not specifically denied in reply of the respondent. In the aforesaid cited case, the concerning applicant, the wives, were not having infant baby and considering such circumstances, the petitions filed by the wife under section 24 were dismissed. Both cited cases are based on the decision of the Apex Court in the matter of Anindita Das Vs. Srijit Das- 2006(9) SCC 197 , in which the child of that woman was aged 6 years and her parents were available to lookafter him but, in the present matter, looking to the age of the father of the applicant and, also the age of infant baby of the applicant, it does not appear possible for the applicant to come and attend the case at Jabalpur, therefore, the aforesaid cited cases are not helping ro the respondent in the present matter. Although this court did not have any dispute with the principle laid down in the aforesaid cited cases. ( 7. ) Apart the above, it is settled proposition of the law that in the matter of difficulties and convenience in comparison of men, women requires lenient consideration. ( 8. Although this court did not have any dispute with the principle laid down in the aforesaid cited cases. ( 7. ) Apart the above, it is settled proposition of the law that in the matter of difficulties and convenience in comparison of men, women requires lenient consideration. ( 8. ) In view of the aforesaid discussion, taking into consideration the convenience and the difficulty of the applicant, I deem fit to allow this petition. Accordingly, the same is allowed and Civil Original Suit No.77-A/09 pending in the court of IVth Addl. District Jabalpur ( Kailash Devani Vs. Smt Rekha alias Richa Dewani) is hereby ordered to be transferred from such Court to the Court of principal judge family court Bhopal for its trial and adjudication. It is made , clear if the principal judge of the family court Bhopal is not functioning then this matter be sent to the District Judge Bhopal for adjudication. Such Courts shall be at liberty to make-over the case to some other court having the territorial jurisdiction for its adjudication. Let aforesaid all the courts be intimated in this regard. ( 9. ) The petition is allowed as indicated above. C.c. as per rules. Petition allowed.