Allowed

Priyanka Bajpai v. Diwakar Shukla

Allahabad HC15 Jul 2024/52/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A wife sought transfer of her husband's restitution of conjugal rights proceedings from Family Court Raebareli to Unnao, citing distance of about 200 km, absence of a male escort and limited means. Relying on Supreme Court judgments favouring the lady's convenience, the High Court allowed the transfer.

What did the court decide?

Transfer of Matrimonial Case No. 136 of 2024 from Principal Judge, Family Court, Raebareli to Principal Judge, Family Court, Unnao within six weeks.

Priyanka Bajpai Vs Diwakar Shukla — Matrimonial and Divorce | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:47965

¶2

Court No. - 19

¶3

Case :- TRANSFER APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 52 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Priyanka Bajpai Opposite Party :- Diwakar Shukla Counsel for Applicant :- Abhineet Jaiswal

¶5

Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.

¶6

The present transfer application has been preferred by the applicant Priyanka Bajpai for transfer of the proceedings under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, bearing Matrimonial Case No. 136 of 2024 titled as Diwakar Shukla versus Priyanka Bajpai, filed by the husband of the applicant, which is pending before the Learned Principal Judge of the Family Court, Raebareli to the Learned Principal Judge of the Family Court, Unnao.

¶7

In the present case, the notice was issued to the respondent husband and as per the ofÏce report dated 01.04.2024, that the notice has been served personally on the opposite party and therefore, service of notice is sufÏcient. Thereafter, the case was listed on 18.04.2024, despite the notice, respondent had not appeared on that date. This court on 18.04.2024, has passed an order for listing of this case on 29.04.2024, in order to give effective representation to the said opposite party and made it clear that the matter may be decided finally on the next date of listing, even in the absence of the opposite party.

¶8

The case has been taken up today. Neither the respondent is present nor any counsel has filed his vakalatnama on his behalf.

¶9

Learned counsel for applicant further submitted that due to the dispute between the applicant and her husband, she left house and came to live at her father's place at Unnao, but unfortunately her father also expired and now the petitioner is living alongwith her mother.

¶10

It is further submitted that the petitioner has to travel approximately 200 Kms i.e. to and fro journey from Raibareli to Unnao, and it is not possible for her to go alone and attend the proceedings of the Court as no male member is available in the family to escort her, except her mother.

¶11

It is further submitted that applicant is the teacher in Primary School and getting a salary which is not sufÏcient to meet both her ends including the expenses for taking care of her mother.

¶12

Learned Counsel for the applicant places reliance on the

¶13

judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs. A.S. Saravana Karthi Sha reported in (2022) SCC OnLine SCC 1199, Pratibha Khemka Vs. Sanjay Kumar Khemka reported in (2004) 13 SCC 686 and Neelam Pathak Vs. Alok Kumar Bharti reported in (2004) 13 SCC 687, wherein it has been held that convenience of the lady should be kept in mind in matrimonial proceedings.

¶14

After hearing learned counsel for the applicant and going through the record of the case and the judgments relied upon by learned counsel for the petitioner, wherein Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that convenience of lady should be kept in mind in the matters of matrimonial disputes, squarely covers the case of the present applicant.

¶15

In view of the aforesaid, the writ petition is allowed .

¶16

Let the case bearing Matrimonial Case No. 136 of 2024 titled as Diwakar Shukla versus Priyanka Bajpai, under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 filed by the husband of the applicant, which is pending before the Learned Principal Judge of the Family Court, Raebareli be transferred to the court of Learned Principal Judge of the Family Court, Unnao within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

¶17

Order Date :- 15.7.2024 DiVYa

¶18

Digitally signed by :- DIVYA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Priyanka Bajpai v. Diwakar Shukla

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Priyanka Bajpai v. Diwakar Shukla

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Surjeet Sonkar and 3 Others vs Shri Ashish Kumar Singh Sub Divisional Magistrate Tehsil Tiloi Dist. Amethi and 5 Others

Uday Kumar Pandey vs Sri Y.K. Singh, Joint Director of Education, Ayodhya and Another

Dr. Ashok Kumar Pundir and Another vs Mrs. Leena Jauhari, Prin. Secy., Ayush ANUBHAG-1, Civil Secrtt., Lko.

Sudha Realtors Pvt. Ltd. Thru. Director Rajesh Singh vs Pradeep Kumar Gupta and 2 Others

Mohammad Wahab vs Up Waqf Tribunal Lucknow Jawahar Bhawan Lucknow through its Chairman and 4 Others

Rashik Ballabh Rastogi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Institutional Finance) Lko. and 5 Others