Allowed

Mrs. Shubhangi (Neeta) Pravin Padalkar v. Mr. Pravin (Popat) Atmaram Padalkar

Bombay HC3 Mar 2023MCA/155/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single Judge allowed Miscellaneous Civil Application to transfer Hindu Marriage Petition and pending Domestic Violence proceedings from sangli to Family Court, Mumbai, due to applicant's custody of a child and residency in Mumbai. The judge ordered transfer of all related pending litigation to the Family Court.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; Hindu Marriage Petition No.274 of 2021 and Domestic Violence proceedings transferred to Family Court, Bandra, Mumbai.

Mrs. Shubhangi (Neeta) Pravin Padalkar Vs Mr. Pravin… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

72-mca-155-2022.doc

¶2

AGK

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

MISCELLANEOUS CIVIL APPLICATION NO.155 OF 2022

¶5

Digitally signed byATUL ATULGANESH GANESHKULKARNI KULKARNI Date: 2023.03.04 13:12:55 +0530

¶6

Shubhangi (Neeta) Pravin Padalkar… Applicant
V/s.
Pravin (Popat) Atmaram Padalkar… Respondent

¶7

Ms. C.S. Gongane for the applicant.

¶8

Mr. Ajinkya M. Udane with Mr. Ranjit Shinde for the
respondent.

¶9

CORAM :AMIT BORKAR, J.

¶10

DATED:MARCH 3, 2023

¶11

P.C.:

¶12

1.The applicant/wife has filed present miscellaneous civil
application for transfer of Hindu Marriage Petition No.274 of 2021
pending before Civil Judge Senior Division, Vita, Sangli to Family
Court, Bandra, Mumbai.

¶13

2.The marriage between applicant and respondent took place
on 29th November 2018. Out of said wedlock, the parties have a
female child aged three and half years.

¶14

3.Due to matrimonial differences, the parties started residing
separately. The applicant has filed DV Application No.200 of 2021
before Metropolitan Magistrate, 51st Court at Kurla, Mumbai. The
respondent has also filed petition for divorce bearing Hindu
Marriage Petition No.274 of 2021 before Civil Judge Senior

¶15

¶16

72-mca-155-2022.doc

¶17

Division, Sangli (Vita).

¶18

4.Since the wife is residing in Mumbai, she has filed
application seeking transfer of proceedings from Sangli (Vita) to
the Family Court, Bandra, Mumbai. Learned advocate for the
respondent objected to the transfer of proceedings.

¶19

5.The applicant is in custody of three and half year old
daughter as single parent. Considering the distance between Sangli
(Vita) and Mumbai, the applicant has made out a case for transfer.

¶20

6.Since the Marriage Petition No.274 of 2021 is being
transferred to Family Court, Bandra, Mumbai, the proceedings
filed by wife under the provisions of the Domestic Violence Act
also needs to be transferred to the Family Court, Bandra, Mumbai.

¶21

7.The miscellaneous civil application is, therefore, allowed in
terms of prayer clause (I). No costs.

¶22

8.In addition to grant of prayer clause (I), the DV proceedings
filed by the wife pending before Metropolitan Magistrate, 51st
Court at Kurla, Mumbai is also transferred to the Family Court,
Mumbai along with Hindu Marriage Petition No.274 of 2021.

¶23

(AMIT BORKAR, J.)

¶24

Mrs. Shubhangi (Neeta) Pravin Padalkar v. Mr. Pravin (Popat) Atmaram Padalkar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mrs. Shubhangi (Neeta) Pravin Padalkar v. Mr. Pravin (Popat) Atmaram Padalkar

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

The State of Maharashtra (through the Special Land Acquisition Officer) and Anr. Vs Shri Baliram Dattaram Dalavi

Pradeep Bhalchandra Keer Vs Vivek Anant Keer and Ors.

M/S. Pradhan Hill Resorts through Its Partner Mr.Aziz a. Pradhan and Anr. Vs Girish @ Gourishankar Bhorilal Khandelwal and Othrs

Avinash Nivrutti Mali Vs Poonam Avinash Mali

Manisha Talgeri Mulgaon, Nee- Manisha Sharad Talgeri Vs Mithil Subhash Mulgaonkar

Tausif Salim Patel Vs Wasima Tausif Patel and Anr.