Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 2528 (RAJ)

Monika v. Deepak Karamchanani

2017-11-16

VIRENDRA KUMAR MATHUR

body2017
JUDGMENT Virendra Kumar Mathur, J. - This Transfer Application under section 24 CPC has been filed for transfer of application No. 421/2016 (Deepak Karamchandani vs. Manika) filed by the respondent under section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, pending before the Family Court No. 1, Jodhpur Metropolitan to Family Court, Jaipur. 2. Briefly stated, the respondent filed an application under section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act for dissolution of marriage dated 30.07.2012 solemnized between the parties. It was contended that the respondent and his family members have tortured and humiliated the petitioner for their unlawful demand of dowry and threatened the petitioner to face consequences if their demand is not fulfilled. On this the petitioner lodged an FIR No. 111/2016 at Women Police Station, Jaipur East on 02.09.2016. After investigation in the matter, the Police filed challan on 09.01.2017 against respondent before Additional Civil Judge & Metropolitan Magistrate No. 15, Jaipur Metropolitan under sections 498A, 406 IPC. 3. It was also averred that from the wedlock, a baby girl "Dolly Karamchandani" was born on 11.07.2013 and from date of her birth she is living with the mother and now she is at tender age of 3 years 6 months. It was also submitted that the petitioner and her minor daughter are completely dependent on petitioner''s father, she has no source of income and the distance between Jaipur to Jodhpur is more than 300 kms which is quite far away. It is very inconvenient for the petitioner to travel all alone with her minor girl child to a distance of more than 300 kms. It was further submitted that the petitioner filed S.B. Civil Transfer Application No. 153/2016 before Jaipur Bench of this Court and the Court vide order dated 18.01.2017 dismissed the petition with liberty to file fresh Transfer Petition before the Principal Seat at Jodhpur. 4. Notices were issued to respondent. The respondent after putting his appearance has filed reply to the application and denied the facts as to harassment & humiliation to petitioner and the demand of dowry. It was further submitted that it is wrong to contend that petitioner and her daughter are completely dependent on petitioner''s father and there is no source of income. It was contended that the petitioner is a woman from sound family and having earning members in her house at Jaipur. It was further submitted that it is wrong to contend that petitioner and her daughter are completely dependent on petitioner''s father and there is no source of income. It was contended that the petitioner is a woman from sound family and having earning members in her house at Jaipur. It was also averred that the respondent is ready to pay her travelling and other expenses to Jodhpur. 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 6. After the marriage between parties, out of the wedlock a girl child was born on 11.07.2013, who is presently 3 years 6 months of age. On account of mental torture and humiliation for unlawful demand of dowry, the petitioner lodged an FIR No. 111/2016 at Women Police Station, Jaipur East on 02.09.2016, in which after investigation Police has filed challan on 09.01.2017 before learned Additional Civil Judge & Metropolitan Magistrate No. 15, Jaipur Metropolitan against the respondent under sections 498A, 406 IPC. Copies of the FIR and challan have been placed on record as Annx.2. The respondent has filed divorce petition before the Family Court, Jodhpur. The respondent has to appear before Additional Civil Judge & Metropolitan Magistrate No. 15, Jaipur Metropolitan for contesting the case registered against him under sections 498A, 406 IPC. 7. It is very difficult for a lady to travel all alone from Jaipur to Jodhpur with minor daughter of 3 years & 6 months age. Although the respondent has submitted that he is ready to pay travelling expenses, only paying travelling expenses can not compensate against inconvenience to the petitioner in travelling all alone from Jaipur to Jodhpur with very young daughter. 8. Looking to the facts & circumstances of the case, when the respondent is already appearing at Jaipur for contesting the case pending against him under sections 498A, 406 IPC before ACJ&MM No. 15, Jaipur Metropolitan, in these circumstances, in the opinion of the Court convenience of the petitioner has to be considered in view of ratio of the judgment of Hon''ble Supreme Court in Vaishali Shridhar Jagtap vs. Shridhar Vishwanath Jagtap reported in 2016 (4) WLN 237 (SC) and it is a fit case to be transferred. 9. 9. Accordingly, this Transfer Application is allowed and the application No. 421/2016 (Deepak Karamchandani vs. Manika), filed by the respondent under section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, pending before the Family Court No. 1, Jodhpur Metropolitan is ordered to be transferred to the Family Court at Jaipur.