Zuberia @ Munni vs Mohammad Hafeez

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

TRANSFER APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 319 of 2025

¶3

Zuberia @ Munni

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

	Versus
Mohammad Hafeez			.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: Harendra Pratap Chaudhary, Vinod : Himanshu Tiwari,	Singh, Kumar Vedika	Dinesh Kr. Dwivedi

¶6

Court No. - 19

¶7

HON'BLE SYED QAMAR HASAN RIZVI, J.

¶8

Heard Sri Vinod Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and perused the material available on record.

¶9

Vide order dated 19.03.2026, the matter was referred to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court and the parties were directed to appear before the Mediation Centre on 27.03.2026 for participating in the mediation proceedings. However, it has been informed that on the said date, the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court was closed on account of holiday on the occasion of Ram Navami.

¶10

It is further submitted that thereafter, with the consent of the parties, the matter was rescheduled vide order dated 02.04.2026 and the parties were directed to appear in-person before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court on 07.04.2026 to participate in the mediation proceedings. It was further directed that on the said date, the opposite party shall deposit an amount of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre in terms of earlier order dated 19.03.2026.

¶11

Office Report dated 30.03.2026 provides that in compliance of the order dated 19.03.2026, learned counsel did not to deposit Rs.5000/(Rupees Five Thousand Only) before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court, hence reference could not be sent to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre. Record shows that no objection/counter affidavit has been filed by the opposite party, till date.

¶12

Today, when the matter has been taken up, no one has appeared on behalf of the opposite party to defend his case.

¶13

TACL No. 319 of 2025

¶14

2

¶15

In view of the above, this Court proceeds to decide the matter on the basis of the pleadings/averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the present transfer application.

¶16

By means of the present application under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 the applicant has prayed for the following relief:

¶17

“That for the facts, reason and circumstance state in the accompanying affidavit it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to transfer the Case No.703 of 2025, parties "Mohammad Hafeez Versus Smt. Zuberia", suit for Restitution of the Conjugal Right pending in the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Bahraich to Principal Judge, Family Court, District Balrampur, having jurisdiction to disposal the cases.”

¶18

The case in brief as put-forth by learned counsel appearing for the applicant is that the marriage ( Nikah ) between the applicant and the opposite party was solemnized on 14.03.2022 as per Muslim rites and rituals in the presence of relatives and friends of both the families. Thereafter, the applicant started residing at her matrimonial home situated at District Bahraich.

¶19

It is submitted on behalf of learned counsel for the applicant that at the time of marriage, the father of the applicant presented gifts as per his financial capacity along with jewellery and household articles, however, the opposite party and his family members were dissatisfied with the same and started demanding a four wheeler vehicle and cash amount of Rs.5,00,000/-.

¶20

It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that from the very inception of marriage, the behaviour of the opposite party and his family members towards the applicant was cruel and humiliating and she was subjected to continuous harassment and ill-treatment on account of unlawful demand of dowry. It is also alleged that the opposite party threatened the applicant with second marriage and physical assault.

¶21

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that on 06.07.2022, the applicant was mercilessly beaten by the opposite party and his family members in connection with additional demand of dowry and was forcibly expelled from her matrimonial home, compelling her to reside at her parental house situated at District Balrampur. Thereafter, the applicant instituted proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C. i.e. Section 144 B.N.S.S. before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Balrampur on 09.01.2023,

¶22

TACL No. 319 of 2025

¶23

3

¶24

which are still pending. It is further submitted that subsequently the opposite party instituted a suit for restitution of conjugal rights having Case No.703 of 2025, in the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Bahraich, alleging therein false and baseless allegations.

¶25

It is pleaded on behalf of the applicant that the purpose of institution of the aforesaid proceedings at Bahraich is only to harass the applicant. The applicant is an almost uneducated lady and housewife having no independent source of income for her livelihood. It is further stated that the parents of the applicant have already expired.

¶26

It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is residing at District Balrampur and the distance between District Balrampur and District Bahraich is about 100 kilometers one way and the applicant has to travel approximately 200 kilometers to attend the Court proceedings on each and every date fixed in the pending case at Bahraich. It is further submitted that being an uneducated lady with no independent source of income and having no one to escort her, it is extremely difficult and inconvenient for her to travel alone to Bahraich. It is also submitted that the opposite party and his family members are continuously threatening and harassing the applicant.

¶27

It is further submitted on behalf of the applicant that proceeding under Section 125 Cr.P.C. now Section 144 B.N.S.S., instituted by the applicant against the opposite party, is already pending before the competent Court at Balrampur and, therefore, in order to avoid multiplicity of proceedings and inconvenience to the applicant, the proceedings instituted by the opposite party at Bahraich deserve to be transferred to Balrampur.

¶28

In the matters of transfer of matrimonial case, the factors of age of wife; distance between the place of residence and the place where matrimonial proceedings were filed, as well as absence of person to escort her, are some of the grounds considered reasonable justification, for directing transfer of case, to a place more suitable, as has been observed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Anjali Ashok Sadhwani Versus Ashok Kishinchand Sadhwani, reported in AIR 2009 SC 1374 , and also in Fatima Versus Jafri Syed Husain (Parvez), reported in AIR 2009 SC 1773.

¶29

In Anjali Ashok Sadhwani (supra) the Hon'ble Supreme Court has been pleased to hold as under:

¶30

"1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. This is an application for transfer filed at the instance of the petitioner wife under Section 25 of the Code of Civil Procedure read with Order 13-B of the Supreme Court Rules, 1966 seeking transfer of Petition No.

¶31

TACL No. 319 of 2025

¶32

4

¶33

83 of 2006 (Ashok Kishinchand Sadhwani v. Anjali Ashok Sadhwani) now pending in the Family Court at Indore to the Family Court at Bandra in Mumbai, Maharashtra.

¶34

2. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and after going through the materials on record and considering the fact that the distance between Mumbai, Maharashtra and Indore, Madhya Pradesh is about 900 kms and also considering the fact that the petitioner wife has no one in her family to escort her during her journey from Mumbai to Indore, we feel it proper to transfer the case from Family Court of Indore, Madhya Pradesh to Family Court at Bandra, Mumbai. Accordingly, the case being Petition No. 83 of 2006 stands transferred from Family Court of Indore, Madhya Pradesh to Family Court of Bandra at Mumbai, Maharashtra."

¶35

The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Fatima (supra) has held as under:-

¶36

"1. This is a petition for transfer of Petition No. A-55 of 2008 pending before the Family Court at Aurangabad Jafri Syed Husain (Parvez) v. Fatima to the Civil Court at Srinagar, in the State of Jammu and Kashmir.

¶37

2. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and after going through the materials on record and considering the fact that the petitioner wife is only 22 years of age and therefore, it would be difficult for her to attend the court proceedings at Aurangabad from Srinagar. Accordingly, we allow this petition for transfer of the aforesaid case now pending before the Family Court at Aurangabad to the Civil Court at Srinagar, Jammu and Kashmir for final disposal. The learned Judge, Family Court at Aurangabad is directed to transmit the case records of the aforesaid case to the Family Court at Srinagar, Jammu and Kashmir within a period of two months from the date of supply of a copy of this order to him."

¶38

Further, the Hon'ble Supreme Court while deciding in the case of Sumita Singh versus Kumar Sanjay and another reported in (2001) 10 Supreme Court Cases 41 in paragraph no. 3 of its judgment has observed as under:

¶39

TACL No. 319 of 2025

¶40

5

¶41

"3. It is the husband's suit against the wife. It is the wife's convenience that, therefore, must be looked at. The circumstances indicated above are sufficient to make the transfer petition absolute."

¶42

In the light of the facts pleaded before this Court that the applicant is an uneducated lady having no independent source of income, whose parents have already expired, solely dependent on her elder brother for her livelihood and who has no one to accompany her during the journey between Balrampur and Bahraich, the distance of which is around 100 kilometers, coupled with the fact that proceedings under Section 144 B.N.S.S. between the parties are already pending at Balrampur, this Court finds it to be a reasonable case for exercise of its power under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Accordingly, the case deserves to be transferred, as prayed for, from the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Bahraich to the Court of equivalent jurisdiction at Balrampur.

¶43

The instant transfer application stands allowed . The Case No.703 of 2025 (Mohammad Hafeez Vs. Smt. Zuberia) filed by the opposite party before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Bahraich, be transferred from the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Bahraich to the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Balrampur.

¶44

The concerned Court at Bahraich shall ensure early transmission of the record to the learned Family Court at Balrampur, which shall proceed in the matter from the stage it is transferred to the said Court.

¶45

(Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi,J.)

¶46

May 25, 2026 Manoj K.

¶47

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

Zuberia @ Munni v. Mohammad Hafeez

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Zuberia @ Munni v. Mohammad Hafeez

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

Hemlata Chaudhary vs Anoop Kumar Verma

Smt. Seema Devi and 4 Others vs Mohd. Nadeem and Others

Smt. Richa @ Richa Maurya vs Amit Kumar

Naan Babu vs Smt. Mehar Jahan and Another

Uppal Chadha Hi Tech Developers Pvt. Ltd. Thru. Ram Parvesh Tiwari vs Rakesh Sood and Another

M/S Spring Garden Thru. Partner, Smt. Neelam Yadav vs Board of Revenue, U.P. Thru. Chairman Lucknow and Others