Allowed

Sangeeta Naresh Vedi v. Naresh Haribhau Vedi

Bombay HC5 Jan 2022MCA/34/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Bombay allowed a Misc. Civil Application seeking the transfer of Hindu Marriage proceedings from the Aurangabad Family Court to the Thane Family Court. The Court noted the applicant's receipt of custody and apprehension of violence.

What did the court decide?

Transfer of Hindu Marriage Petition No. A-23 of 2021 from Family Court, Aurangabad to Family Court, Thane.

Sangeeta Naresh Vedi Vs Naresh Haribhau Vedi — Matrimonial and Divorce | Bombay HC (2022)

¶1

(904)-MCA-34-21.doc .

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO.34 OF 2021

¶4

Digitally signed by BALAJI BALAJIGOVINDRAO GOVINDRAOPANCHAL PANCHAL Date: 2022.01.05 15:12:17 +0530

¶5

Mrs. Sangeeta Naresh Vedi..Applicant
Versus
Mr. Naresh Haribhau Vedi ..Respondent

¶6

Ms. Nisha Ghanshyam Dubey, for the Applicant.
None for the Respondent.

¶7

CORAM : NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.

¶8

 DATE : 5th JANUARY, 2022

¶9

P.C.

¶10

1. Heard Ms. Nisha Dubey, learned counsel for the
applicant.

¶11

2. Mr. G. J. Karne, learned counsel has put his appearance
for the non-applicant.

¶12

3. Though matter was called out twice on 3rd January,
2022, counsel for non-applicant remained absent. As such, by way
of last chance, matter was adjourned so as to enable counsel for the
non-applicant to address this Court. Even today also, counsel for
the non-applicant is absent.

¶13

4. Applicant is seeking transfer of proceedings being Hindu
Marriage Petition No.A-23 of 2021 initiated by the respondent on

¶14

BGP. 1 o f 2

¶15

(904)-MCA-34-21.doc .

¶16

the file of Family Court, Aurangabad to Family Court, Thane. The
claim of the applicant is marriage between the parties took place on
31st May, 2001 and out of matrimonial discord non-applicant has
initiated aforesaid proceedings. It is further brought to my notice
that the applicant is custodian of the daughter and she has every
reason to believe that the non-applicant/husband will commit
violence.In the aforesaid background, the issue of hardship has to
be answered in favour of the applicant.

¶17

5. As such, prayer for transfer is allowed in terms of prayer
clauses (A) and (B).

¶18

[NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.]

¶19

2 o f 2

¶20

BGP.

Sangeeta Naresh Vedi v. Naresh Haribhau Vedi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sangeeta Naresh Vedi v. Naresh Haribhau Vedi

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

Simplex Infrastructure Limited vs Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and Anr.

Mr. Ashok Vithoba Ghone Vs Mr. Ramchandra Shankar Khomane through His Lrs. and Ors.

Smt. Twinkle Dhananjay Dhavale Vs Dhananjay Ganesh Dhavale

Sou. Puja Somnath Markad Vs Shri. Somnath Namdev Markad

Chetana Vinod Punamiya Vs Vinod Suresh Punamiya

Sou. Poonam Yogesh Shete Vs Yogesh Jagannath Shete