Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2011 DIGILAW 1123 (RAJ)

Neetu Khatri v. Ravi Khatri

2011-05-25

SANGEET LODHA

body2011
JUDGMENT 1. - This transfer application under Section 24 of Civil Procedure Code has been filed for transfer of Civil Misc. Case No. 261/2010 pending in the Family Court, Udaipur to the Court of District judge, Bhilwara. 2. The respondent filed a divorce petition against the petitioner under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (in short "the Act") before the Family Court, Udaipur. An application preferred by the petitioner under Section 125 Cr.P.C. is pending before the Court of Judicial Magistrate No. 2, Bhilwara. Besides, on F.I.R. being lodged by the petitioner for offence under Sections 498-a, 40 I.P.C. after investigation, police filed the negative final report and therefore, the petitioner has filed a protest petition before the Court of Judicial Magistrate No. 2, Bhilwara which is pending consideration. Learned counsel submitted that the respondent is already attending the dates of hearing in two cases before the Court at Bhilwara and therefore, no inconvenience will be caused to him if the divorce petition pending before the Family Court, Udaipur is transferred to the Court of District Judge, Bhilwara. Learned counsel submitted that there is nobody to accompany the petitioner while she takes journey to Udaipur to attend the dates of hearing before the Family Court, Udaipur. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondent has opposed the transfer petition. Learned counsel submitted that the inconvenience of the petitioner as alleged cannot be a ground for transfer of the matter from one Court to another. It is submitted that Bhilwara is only 145 Kms. away from Udaipur and therefore, no inconvenience is likely to be caused to the petitioner during the journey. 4. I have considered the rival submissions. 5. Indisputably, the Court is required to consider each transfer petition on its own merits. The convenience of the parties is also a relevant consideration and in the matrimonial matters, where the petition is filed by the husband, the convenience of the wife has to be given weight-age. This stands fortified from the fact that even the legislature in its wisdom realising this aspect of the matter by way of the Hindu Marriage (Amendment) Act, 2003 (Act 50 of 2003) has inserted Clause (iiia) in Section 19 of the Act of 1955 in terms that in case the wife is the petitioner, the petition can be filed where she is residing on the date of presentation. 6. 6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances noticed above, for the convenience of the parties and in the interest of justice, in considered opinion of this Court, it will be appropriate that the matrimonial case filed by the respondent pending before the Family Court, Udaipur is transferred to the Court of District Judge, Bhilwara. 7. Accordingly, the transfer petition is allowed. The Civil Miscellaneous Case No. 261/2010 pending in the Family Court, Udaipur is directed to be transferred to the Court of District Judge, Bhilwara. The parties shall appear before the Court of District Judge, Bhilwara on 15.6.2011.Application allowed. *******