Dr. Richa Shukla vs Additional Principal Judge (Court No. 4) Family Court Lucknow and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:31540

Court No. - 16

Case :- TRANSFER APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 246 of 2024

Applicant :- Dr. Richa Shukla Opposite Party :- Additional Principal Judge (Court No. 4) Family Court Lucknow And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rakesh Kumar Srivastava,Ramakar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- Anchal Srivastava,Rakesh Kumar Verma,Ravi Shanker Tewari,Vishwakant Srivastava

¶5

Hon'ble Manoj Bajaj,J.

¶6

Applicant-wife has filed this petition under Section 24 Code of Civil Procedure for transfer of Matrimonial Case No. 2131 of 2020; titled Amarjeet Mishra vs. Dr. Richa Shukla , under Section 13 Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 pending before Additional Principal Judge, Family Court (Court No. 4, Lucknow to the court of competent jurisdiction at District Sultanpur.

¶7

Mr. Ramakar Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant-wife has submitted that the subject case was filed by opposite party no. 2-husband under Section 13 Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for dissolution of marriage, which is pending adjudication before Family Court at Lucknow. Learned counsel submits that after separation, the applicant-wife is presently residing at Sultanpur, where other three cases filed by her against the husband are pending adjudication, and in this regard, he has drawn the attention of the Court to Paras '8' to '10' of the application. He further submits that the applicant visited the courts at Lucknow on 30th September, 2023 and 4th August, 2024 to contest the case, but the sister of opposite party no. 2 had threatened her on telephone, therefore, in this background, learned counsel prays for transfer of the subject case from Lucknow to Sultanpur.

¶8

The prayer is vehemently opposed by Mr. Ravi Shanker Tewari, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party no. 2- husband, who has argued that the divorce petition was instituted in the year 2020, but till date, the wife-applicant has not filed any written statement. He submits that the other cases filed at Sultanpur were filed subsequent to the divorce petition, therefore, the pendency of other cases at Sultanpur alone would not be enough for transfer of the case. According to him, the averments in the application regarding threats extended to the

¶9

applicant are also vague and without any particulars. He prays that the application be dismissed.

¶10

Upon hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering their submissions, this Court finds that as per the pleadings of the applicant herself, she appeared before the Family Court at Lucknow on two occasions, i.e. 30th September, 2023 and 4th August, 2024, and concededly, the written statement is yet to be filed by her in the said case. Though, in paragraph '12' of the application, it is averred that sister of the opposite party no. 2-husband had extended threats to the applicant on telephone, but the said averments are not supported with any convincing material, much less the date, time and other particulars of the said threats. That apart, even after that the wife has moved an application under Section 9 Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 seeking restitution of conjugal rights, and it means that she is interested to reside with the husband.

¶11

During the course of hearing, it is pointed by the learned counsel for the parties that the distance between the Lucknow and Sultanpur is nearly 140 kms, therefore, considering the above background, particularly the nature of case, no exceptional ground is made out for transfer of the divorce petition.

¶12

Consequently, the application fails and is hereby dismissed.

¶13

Order Date :- 27.5.2025 Brijesh

¶14

Digitally signed by :- BRIJESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Dr. Richa Shukla v. Additional Principal Judge (Court No. 4) Family Court Lucknow and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr. Richa Shukla v. Additional Principal Judge (Court No. 4) Family Court Lucknow and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Vali Mohd. and 6 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Dinesh Kumar Shukla and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Nankali vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Surya Dev vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. (Home) Lko. and Another

Jai Pratap Singh @ Mohit vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Shivdutt Alias Shiva vs State of U.P. and Another