Durgawati Yadav Vs Saurabh Kumar Yadav

None appeared on behalf of the respondent despite the name of Shri Imran Ullah Khan, Advocate having been shown as learned counsel for the respondent.

¶10

The instant application has been preferred under Section 24 C.P.C. seeking transfer of proceedings initiated by the respondent under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act bearing Suit No.3536 of 2022 ( Saurabh Kumar Yadav Vs. Durgawati) pending before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Lucknow to the appropriate court in Deoria.

¶11

The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner and respondent were married on 19.6.2019, however on account of matrimonial discord, the petitioner is residing with her parents in District Deoria. The respondent has initiated proceedings in District Lucknow under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act. It is urged that the applicant does not have any independent source of income and the distance between Deoria to Lucknow is such that it is not feasible for her to

¶12

travel to Lucknow to contest the said proceedings and in the said circumstances, the suit under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act filed by the respondent in Lucknow may be transferred to Deoria.

¶13

Despite a counter affidavit having been filed by the respondent, none has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent and having taken note of the contents of the counter affidavit, allegations have been levelled that the petitioner is competent to earn as she is Law Graduate and therefore it is incorrect that there is no source of income. Another allegation has been levelled that she belongs to the political family and an endeavour is being made to harass the respondent in Deoria where he apprehends that there would be a threat to his life.

¶14

Be that as it may, considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances as well as also noticing the dictum of the Apex Court in the case of Leena Mukherjee Vs. Rabi Shankar Mukherjee reported in 2002 (10) SCC 480, in the case of Pratibha Khemka Vs. Sanjay Kumar Khemka reported in 2004 (13) SCC 686, in the case of Neelm Kanwar Vs. Devinder Singh Kanwar reported in 2000 (1) SCC 589 and in the case of N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs. A.S. Saravana Karthik reported in 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1199 , the preference of venue would be given to the lady.

¶15

In the aforesaid circumstance, this Court does not find that there is any legal impediment and the

¶16

ends of justice can be met by directing the transfer of proceedings filed by the respondent at Lucknow bearing proceedings of Case No.3536 of 2022 (supra) to appropriate court in Deoria.

¶17

Accordingly, the present transfer application is allowed. Principal Judge, Family Court, Lucknow shall forthwith transfer Case No.3536 of 2022 (Saurabh Kumar Yadav Vs. Durgawati) to the Principal Judge, Family Court in Deoria who upon receipt of the record of case under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act from the Lucknow, shall attempt to consider and decide the said suit without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties and most expeditiously so that the proceedings can be taken to its logical conclusion, as expeditiously as possible.

¶18

In case if any of the parties misuse the liberty and procrastinate the litigation, the court concerned shall be well within its competence to impose appropriate costs progressively in the light of the principles laid down by the Apex Court in case of Vinod Seth Vs. Devinder Bajaj and another : (2010) 8 SCC 1.

¶19

Order Date :- 6.5.2025 Shukla

¶20

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

Durgawati Yadav v. Saurabh Kumar Yadav

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Durgawati Yadav v. Saurabh Kumar Yadav

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Smt. Rajmati Singh Vs Sri Raj Pratap Singh Addl. Chief Secy. Basic Shiksha Anubh

Omprakash Singh Vs Amit Verma, S.P., Distt. Lko. Joint Police Commissioner Lko.

Kamal Deep Yadav and 2 Others Vs Sudha Verma, Member Secy. U.P. Rajya Mahila Aayog, U.P.

Sudha Agarwal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Stamp and Registration, Deptt. Lko. and Others

Julfekar Ahmad Vs Registrar, Firms, Society and Chits, Lko. and 4 Others

Smt. Mahima Singh Vs Ritesh Singh