Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 1617 (RAJ)

Padma Shekhawat v. Hemendra Singh Shekhawat

2015-09-02

ARUN BHANSALI

body2015
JUDGMENT : Arun Bhansali, J. This petition under Section 24 CPC has been filed by the petitioner-wife seeking transfer of proceedings from Family Court No.1, Jaipur to Family Court at Jodhpur. 2. It is inter-alia indicated in the application that on account of matrimonial disputes, the petitioner initiated proceedings under Section 498A & 406 IPC before the courts at Jodhpur where the proceedings are pending. Where after, the petitioner has initiated proceedings under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 ('the HM Act') before the Family Court No.1, Jaipur and therefore, the petitioner has filed the present proceedings seeking transfer of the proceedings from Jaipur to Jodhpur. 3. During the pendency of the present transfer petition, the respondent has initiated proceedings under Section 25 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 ('the Act') seeking custody of minor son before the Family Court No.1, Jodhpur. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of the fact that now more than one proceedings are already pending consideration before the courts at Jodhpur, the proceedings at Jaipur be transferred to Jodhpur for convenient disposal for the parties. 5. Allegations have been made in the petition regarding threatening being handed out to the petitioner on her appearing at Jaipur. 6. A reply to the transfer petition has been filed by the respondent vehemently opposing the prayer for transfer. It is inter-alia indicated that the conduct of the petitioner is such that she is not entitled to any relief from this Court. 7. With reference to her conduct pertaining to her previous marriage, it is submitted that therein also petitioner had initiated proceedings under Section 498A IPC, the proceedings initiated by the petitioner under the provisions of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 ('the Violence Act') had already been rejected by the competent court and the petitioner is seeking transfer of proceedings to Jodhpur merely with a view to harass the respondent, who is required to look-after his old parents also and therefore, the application deserves to be dismissed. 8. Learned counsel for the respondent also made submissions in consonance with the contents of the reply. 8. Learned counsel for the respondent also made submissions in consonance with the contents of the reply. It was submitted that the proceedings from Jaipur to Jodhpur cannot be transferred on account of the conduct of the petitioner, wherein the proceedings initiated by the respondent under Section 9 of the HM Act was required to be withdrawn on account of conduct of the petitioner, wherein she sought transfer of those proceedings as well. It is also submitted that the transfer of proceedings from one place to another cannot be a matter of choice and on that count also, the petition deserves to be dismissed. 9. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and have perused the material available on record. 10. It is not in dispute that proceedings pertaining to matrimonial disputes between the parties i.e. criminal proceedings under Section 498A IPC and another proceedings under Section 25 of the Act are pending consideration before the courts at Jodhpur. 11. Another proceedings initiated by respondent is pending at Jaipur and it is only in fitness of things that all the proceedings pertaining to matrimonial disputes are conduct simultaneously at one place. It is not doubt true that the transfer of proceedings from one place to another cannot be a matter of choice as submitted by learned counsel for the respondent. However, the very fact that all the proceedings pertains to matrimonial disputes and it is also not in the benefit of the parties that all different proceedings are conducted before different courts so as to make all the parties to move from one place to another. 12. In view of the above, it would be appropriate to transfer the proceedings pending at Family Court No.1, Jaipur to Family Court No.1, Jodhpur wherein another proceedings initiated by the respondent under Section 25 of the Act are pending. It would be appropriate, if the Family Court would fix the same dates in all the proceedings so that the respondent is not required to travel from Jaipur to Jodhpur on different dates. 13. In view of the above, the petition is allowed, Case No.440/2014 pending before the Family Court No.1, Jaipur is directed to be transferred to Family Court No.1, Jodhpur. The parties shall appear before the Family Court No.1, Jodhpur on 21.9.2015. 13. In view of the above, the petition is allowed, Case No.440/2014 pending before the Family Court No.1, Jaipur is directed to be transferred to Family Court No.1, Jodhpur. The parties shall appear before the Family Court No.1, Jodhpur on 21.9.2015. The Family Court No.1, Jaipur is directed to remit the record to Family Court No.1, Jodhpur immediately. No order as to costs.