Allowed

Swati Shridhar Ubale v. Shridhar Murlidhar Ubale

Bombay HC13 Oct 2023MCA/227/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Bombay High Court, in a miscellaneous civil application, considered transferring divorce proceedings filed by the respondent-husband at Satara to CBD Belapur. Citing socio-economic factors and the convenience of the applicant-wife who resides in Navi Mumbai with their minor child, the Court ordered the transfer.

What did the court decide?

Divorce proceedings pending before the Civil Judge Senior Division, Satara, transferred to the Court of Civil Judge Senior Division at CBD Belapur.

Swati Shridhar Ubale Vs Shridhar Murlidhar Ubale — Matrimonial and Divorce | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

23-MCA-227-2021.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶3

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

MISCELLANEOUS CIVIL APPLICATION NO.227 OF 2021

¶5

SWATI SHRIDHAR UBALE )...APPLICANT

¶6

V/s.

¶7

SHRIDHAR MURLIDHAR UBALE )...RESPONDENT

¶8

Mr.Harshad Sathe, Advocate for the Applicant (Legal Aid). Mr.D.D.Rananaware, Advocate for the Respondent.

¶9

CORAM : ABHAY AHUJA, J. DATE : 13^th OCTOBER 2023

¶10

P.C. :

¶11

This is an Application seeking transfer of Divorce proceedings filed by the Respondent-husband before the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Satara to the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Thane.

¶12

Today, when the matter is called out, Mr.Harshad Sathe, learned Counsel for the Applicant-wife, appointed through legal aid, would submit that now there is also a Court at CBD Belapur. The Applicantwife resides at Turbhe, Navi Mumbai, which comes under the jurisdiction of CBD, Belapur, and therefore, he seeks leave of this Court

¶13

avk 1/5

¶14

23-MCA-227-2021.doc

¶15

to amend the Application. Mr.D.D.Rananaware, learned Counsel for the Respondent-husband has no objection. Let the amendment be carried out forthwith.

¶16

Mr.Harshad Sathe for the Applicant-wife would submit that the marriage between the Applicant-wife and the Respondent-husband was solemnized on 25^th May 2013 at Satara. Thereafter, on 15^th March 2014, the Applicant-wife gave birth to a girl child. On 14^th July 2015, the Respondent-husband sent a notice to the Applicant-wife. The said notice was replied by the Applicant-wife. After this, on 6^th March 2020, the Applicant-wife received a notice with respect to the Divorce Petition filed by the Respondent-husband before the Civil Judge Senior Division at Satara.

¶17

Mr.Harshad Sathe would submit that the Applicant-wife is residing at Turbhe, Navi Mumbai along with her mother. It is submitted that the Applicant-wife has a 9 year old girl child, who goes to a Municipal school. It is submitted that the Applicant-wife as well as the mother have very meagre resources to sustain, as both of them are presently working as house-help. That, the distance between Satara and Navi Mumbai is 225 kilmeters one way and it would not only be

¶18

avk 2/5

¶19

23-MCA-227-2021.doc

¶20

inconvenient for the Applicant-wife to leave her daughter and mother and travel to Satara, every time the matter is listed there. Learned Counsel would submit that, infact, the Applicant-wife does not have money even to travel to Satara, considering the nature of work she performs. Learned Counsel would submit that the stage of the Divorce proceedings, at which they were stayed by this Court, was for appearance.

¶21

On the other hand, Mr.D.D.Rananaware for the Respondenthusband would submit that a number of times endeavour has been made to settle the dispute between the parties, however, since the demands from the Applicant-wife are too exorbitant, the same have not fructified. He would submit that the Respondent-husband has a small shop of mobile covers, and therefore, has been unable to meet the demands raised by the Applicant-wife to settle the matter. Learned Counsel would submit that the Respondent-husband lives in Shirval, Satara.

¶22

It is observed from the record that Mediation between the parties has failed.

¶23

avk 3/5

¶24

23-MCA-227-2021.doc

¶25

The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs. A.S. Saravana Karthik Sha¹ has emphasized that the cardinal principle for exercise of power under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure is that the ends of justice should demand the transfer of the suit, appeal or other proceeding. That, given the prevailing socio-economic paradigm in the Indian society, generally, it is the wife’s convenience which must be looked at while considering transfer.

¶26

In Rajani Kishor Pardeshi vs. Kishor Babulal Pardeshi² , the Hon'ble Supreme Court has laid down the convenience of wife has to be preferred over the convenience of husband.

¶27

In the aforementioned facts and circumstances and keeping in mind the aforesaid principles, this Court is of the view that ends of justice would be met if the Divorce proceedings pending before the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Satara are transferred to the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division at CBD Belapur.

¶28

The Application is made absolute in terms of amended Prayer clause (a) which reads thus :

¶29

1 SCC Online SC 1199 (2022)

¶30

2 2005 (12) SCC 237

¶31

avk 4/5

¶32

23-MCA-227-2021.doc

¶33

“That this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to transfer the Hindu Marriage Petition No. 69 of 2020 pending before the Civil Judge Senior Division, Satara to Learned Civil Judge Senior Division, CBD Belapur at CBD Belapur.”

¶34

It is made clear that any observations on the merits of the dispute between the parties is only to consider this application which shall not influence the trial or disposal of the Marriage Petition which is to be tried and decided on its own merits uninfluenced by the said observations.

¶35

(ABHAY AHUJA, J.)

¶36

avk 5/5

¶37

Signed by: Mrs.Arti V. Khatate Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 16/10/2023 20:13:49

Swati Shridhar Ubale v. Shridhar Murlidhar Ubale

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Swati Shridhar Ubale v. Shridhar Murlidhar Ubale

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Achita Aditya Rane Vs Mr. Aditya Anil Rane

Smt. Ankita Ketan Gandhi Vs Mr. Ketan Ajit Gandhi

Sou. Lata Surendrasingh Rajput Vs Shri. Surendrasingh Ishwarsingh Rajput

Rupali Narayan Sawant Vs Naresh Sarjerao Maske

Swati Shridhar Ubale Vs Shridhar Murlidhar Ubale

Tanager Investments Private Limited vs Orbit Corporation Limited in Liquidation through Official Liquidator