Sunita Maurya vs Ravindra Maurya — Matrimonial and Divorce | Allahabad HC (2025)

Sunita Maurya vs Ravindra Maurya — Matrimonial and Divorce | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Disposed

Issue for consideration

Whether the application under Section 24 C.P.C. seeking transfer of Matrimonial Case No. 1814 of 2024 (Ravindra Maurya versus Sunita Maurya) pending before the Court of learned Additional Principal Judge, 7th, Lucknow to the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Unnao should be permitted. +1 more

Ratio / Principle

Finding the dispute between the parties capable of settlement through mediation, the Court resolved to call upon the opposite party to be present in person before it on 27.11.2025 so that his consent regarding settlement through the Mediation & Conciliation Centre of the Court could be obtained; adjudication of the transfer request was thereby deferred to that date.

Key takeaways

Sri Abhishek Kumar Pandey, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State of U.P., who was present in Court, was directed to communicate the order to the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, District- Lucknow, who shall facilitate service of the copy of the order upon the opposite party and ensure his presence before the Court on the next date fixed.ratio¶¶16
In the event the parties give their consent for amicable settlement, the matter is to be referred to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court on the next date.ratio¶¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

TAC (C) No. 281 of 2025, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench, Court No. 20, single bench of Hon'ble Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi, J. (dated November 13, 2025): applicant-wife Sunita Maurya, represented by Ms. Sunita Dwivedi and Himanshu Tiwari, seeks transfer under Section 24 C.P.C. of Matrimonial Case No. 1814 of 2024 (Ravindra Maurya versus Sunita Maurya), filed by the opposite party-husband under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and pending before the Court of learned Additional Principal Judge, 7th, Lucknow, to the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Unnao. Grounds advanced: the applicant is a housewife living with her widow mother at Unnao, has limited source of income making Pairvi at Lucknow difficult, and alleges the suit is nothing but to harass her. On counsel indicating possibility of amicable settlement, the Court, without adjudicating the transfer, found it appropriate to summon the opposite party in person on 27.11.2025 so that his consent regarding settlement through the Mediation & Conciliation Centre of the Court could be obtained; directed Sri Abhishek Kumar Pandey, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State of U.P., to communicate the order to the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, District- Lucknow for service upon the opposite party and ensuring his presence; and listed the case fresh for 27.11.2025, with conditional reference to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre upon both parties consenting.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

TRANSFER APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 281 of 2025

Sunita Maurya

.....Applicant(s)

	Versus
Ravindra Maurya	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: Sunita Dwivedi, Himanshu Tiwari :

Court No. - 20

HON'BLE SYED QAMAR HASAN RIZVI, J.

Heard Ms. Sunita Dwivedi, learned Counsel for the applicant.

The present application under Section 24 of C.P.C. has been preferred by the applicant for transfer of Matrimonial Case No. 1814 of 2024 (Ravindra Maurya versus Sunita Maurya) filed under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, pending before the Court of learned Additional Principal Judge, 7th, Lucknow to the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Unnao.

The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is a house wife and is living with her widow mother at Unnao. She submits that since the applicant is having limited source of income, it is difficult for her to do Pairvi of the aforesaid case at Lucknow. It is also submitted on behalf of the applicant that the suit under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act filed by the opposite party is nothing but to harass the petitioner.

On being asked whether there is any possibility of amicable settlement of the dispute between the parties, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant has answered in affirmative.

Looking into the fact that the dispute between the parties can be settled through mediation, this Court finds it appropriate to call upon the opposite party to be present in person before this Court on 27.11.2025 so that his consent be obtained regarding the settlement of the dispute through

TACL No. 281 of 2025

2

Mediation & Conciliation Centre of this Court.

Sri Abhishek Kumar Pandey, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State of U.P., who is present in the Court, is directed to communicate this order to the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, District- Lucknow who shall facilitate the service of the copy of this order upon the opposite party on his address mentioned in the writ petition and shall ensure his presence before this Court on the next date fixed.

Put up this case on 27.11.2025 in the list of fresh cases.

In case, if the parties give their consent for amicable settlement, the matter may be referred to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court on the next date.

(Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi,J.)

November 13, 2025

Abhishek Gupta

Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench