Allowed

Sou. Sangita Ashok Zimbal v. Shri. Ashok Wamna Zimbal

Bombay HC1 Apr 2014MCA/154/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment allows a misc. civil application under section 24 CPC seeking transfer of a Hindu Marriage Petition from Civil Judge, Dhule to Civil Judge, Vaduj. The Court held that a case for transfer was made out as the respondent resided within the local limits of the latter court, adhering to section 19(ii) of the Hindu Marriage Act.

What did the court decide?

The application for transfer of Hindu Marriage Petition No. 75 of 2012 to Civil Judge, Senior Division, Vaduj, Khatav is allowed.

Sou. Sangita Ashok Zimbal Vs Shri. Ashok Wamna… — Succession and Inheritance | Bombay HC (2014)

: 1 :

20.mca.154.12

ingale

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶5

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶6

MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 154 OF 2012

¶7

Sau. Sangita Ashok Zimbal .. Applicant

¶8

Vs.

¶9

Shri Ashok Waman Zimbal .. Respondent

¶10

Ms.Sheetal Ubale i/b Mr.R.V.Bansode, Advocate for the applicant.

¶11

CORAM : R.G.KETKAR, J. DATE : 01^st April, 2014

¶12

P.C. :

¶13

. Heard Ms.Sheetal Ubale, learned Counsel for the

¶14

applicant.

¶15

Perused the earlier orders. Office remark dated 24/03/2014 shows that notice on respondent is served. None appears for the respondent despite service.

¶16

By order dated 13/12/2012, this Court issued notice to the respondent, returnable after 3 weeks. Humdast was allowed. Liberty was also granted to serve the respondent privately. By subsequent order dated 17/09/2013 in Civil Application No. 170 of 2013, this Court extended the returnable date for a period of 3 weeks and adjourned the matter to 08/10/2013 for final hearing. Private notice was also permitted. By order dated 08/10/2013, hearing of this application was adjourned to 22/10/2013 and adinterim relief in

¶17

: 2 :

¶18

20.mca.154.12

¶19

terms of prayer clause (b) was granted. As noted earlier, though respondent is served, none appears on his behalf. No reply is filed in opposition.

¶20

By this application under section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ( for short 'C.P.C'), the applicantwife has sought transfer of Hindu Marriage Petition No. 75 of 2012 pending before Civil Judge, Senior Division, Dhule to Civil Judge, Senior Division Vaduj, Khatav, Taluka Khatav, Dist. Satara. Ms.Ubale invited my attention to paragraphs 5 to 8 of the application and submitted that for the reasons stated therein, Hindu Marriage Petition instituted by the respondent deserves to be transferred.

¶21

It is not in dispute that respondent had instituted Hindu Marriage Petition No. 75 of 2012 under section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short 'Act'). Section 19(ii) provides that every petition shall be presented to the District Court within the local limits of whose ordinary original civil jurisdiction, the respondent, at the time of the presentation of the petition resides. In the present case, the applicant who is respondent in the Hindu Marriage Petition is residing at Landewadi, Jambhulani, Tal. Man, Dist.Satara which is also roughly 65 kms. from the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Vaduj. In view of section 19(ii) of the Act, as also for the reasons stated in paragraphs 5 to 8, a case for transfer is made out. The application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a) with no order as to

: 3 :

20.mca.154.12

costs.

After proceedings are transmitted from the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Dhule to the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division Vaduj, Khatav, Taluka Khatav, Dist. Satara, the learned District Judge will issue notice to the respondent herein (petitioner therein) and proceed with the matter in accordance with law. Order accordingly.

¶26

(R.G.KETKAR)

Sou. Sangita Ashok Zimbal v. Shri. Ashok Wamna Zimbal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sou. Sangita Ashok Zimbal v. Shri. Ashok Wamna Zimbal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ramchandra Balu Sutar(D/H) Vs Malati Madhav Patne (D/H) ( Thro. Her Power of Attorney ) Madhav Ganpati Patne

Ramchandra Balu Sutar(D/H) Vs Malati Madhav Patne (D/H)( Thro. Her Power of Attorney ) Madhav Ganpati Patne

Dattatraya Tatyaba Thorat and Anr. Vs Smt. Pushpalata Ramchandra Shinde and Anr.

Shri. Vasudeo Raghunath Malvade Vs Smt. Kamal Kisan Karanjikar

Tipusaheb G.Pinjari Vs Sardar Balu Mujawar and Anr.

Shri. Vasudeo Raghunath Malvade Vs Smt. Kamal Kisan Karanjikar