Allowed

Smita Ashok Patil v. Ashok Ramesh Patil

Bombay HC23 Jan 2014MCA/69/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application seeking transfer of pending divorce proceedings from Solapur to Beed, the High Court considered the hardship for the wife residing with her mother in Beed. Weighing the distance of 175 kms against the respondent's claim of unemployment, the court prioritized the wife's convenience and allowed the transfer.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings under H.M.P.A.A.No.92/2013 transferred from Family Court Solapur to Civil Judge, Senior Division, Beed; parties directed to appear on 24.02.2014.

Smita Ashok Patil Vs Ashok Ramesh Patil — Matrimonial and Divorce | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

M.C.A.No.69/2013

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO.69 OF 2013

¶5

Sow. Smita w/o Ashok Patil Age 25 years, Occ. Household, R/o Plot No.15, Area No.3, Bhushan Nagar, Wangi Road, Solapur Tq. and District Solapur, Now Residing at : C/o Smt. Jyoti Subhash Patil Moujkar Park, Pangri Road, Beed, Tq. and District Beed ... APPLICANT

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

Ashok s/o Ramesh Patil Age 33 years, Occ. Service, R/o Plot No.15, Area No.3, Bhushan Nagar, Wangi Road, Solapur Tq. and District Solapur

¶8

... RESPONDENT

¶9

Shri Madan Deshmukh, Advocate holding for Shri R.V. Deshmukh, Advocate for applicant Shri S.S. Deshmukh, Advocate holding for Shri P.G. Rodge, Advocate for respondent

¶10

CORAM: A.I.S. CHEEMA, J.

¶11

DATED: 23rd January, 2014.

¶12

PER COURT :

¶13

Perused the application. Heard learned counsel

¶14

for both the sides, finally. The applicant-wife claims that she is residing with her mother due to matrimonial dispute.

¶15

M.C.A.No.69/2013

¶16

¶17

She claims that, she has a daughter. She filed proceedings under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code at Beed, where she is staying with her mother. The respondent has filed matrimonial proceedings before the Family Court at Solapur for divorce. It is claimed that mother or brother of the applicant cannot accompany her for attending the Court at Solapur on each and every date and the proceedings need to be transferred.

¶18

Counsel for respondent is submitting that the respondent is unemployed and he does not have the financial capacity to attend the proceedings at Beed if the proceedings are transferred from Solapur.

¶19

The applicant has claimed that the respondent is in service. Counsel for applicant refers to Section 125 proceedings filed by the applicant, where, in para No.15 it is claimed that the respondent is working as a Manager in Videocon Company.

¶20

Looking to the claim made that the distance between Solapur and Beed is 175 Kms., in such matter, convenience of the wife needs to be considered. It would be difficult for a young woman to travel from Beed to

¶21

M.C.A.No.69/2013

¶22

¶23

Solapur on various dates and either to stay at Solapur after attending the proceedings or come back late in the evening. In the circumstances, the application is allowed.

¶24

(A) H.M.P. A.A.No.92/2013, pending before the Family Court, Solapur is transferred to the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Beed for decision according to law.

¶25

(B) The Family Court, Solapur to duly forward the proceedings urgently to to the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Beed.

¶26

(C) The parties are directed to appear before the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Beed on 24th February 2014. No separate notice of proceedings after transfer shall be necessary.

¶27

(D) The application is disposed of.

¶28

(A.I.S. CHEEMA, J.)

¶29

fmp/mca69.13

Smita Ashok Patil v. Ashok Ramesh Patil

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smita Ashok Patil v. Ashok Ramesh Patil

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vaidhyakiya Karmachari Sanghtana Ahmednagar Zilla Ahmednagar. and Ors. Vs Rural Medical College, Thr. Its Principal Dr. S Venkataramani and Ors.

Shaikh Kadir Shaikh Shammad Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Chhagan Sonu Nikumbhe Vs Begambai Piran Naik and Ors.

Bahujan Samaj Prabodhan Shikshan Sanstha, Kotul Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Shivprakash Ramkishan Malpani and Ors. Vs Kunal Ashokrao Aher and Others

Sachin Pandurang Marathe Vs Ajitkumar Vasantrao Patil