Allowed

Ashwini Sharadchandra Patil v. Sharadchandra Subhasrao Patil

Bombay HC11 Dec 2023MCA/281/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a miscellaneous civil application to transfer dissolution of marriage proceedings from Civil Judge Senior Division, Udgir, to Ambajogai. The court found the applicant faced travel inconvenience, lacked income, and faced hardship, unlike the respondent.

What did the court decide?

Transfer of H.M.P. No. 126 of 2018 from Civil Judge Senior Division, Udgir, to Civil Judge Senior Division, Ambajogai.

Ashwini Sharadchandra Patil Vs Sharadchandra… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

182 MISC.CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 281 OF 2019

¶4

ASHWINI SHARADCHANDRA PATIL VERSUS SHARADCHANDRA SUBHASRAO PATIL

¶5

... Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Jitendra V. Patil h/f. Mr. Akash D. Gade

¶6

… CORAM : SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J. DATE : 11^th DECEMBER, 2023

¶7

PER COURT :

¶8

Heard the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶9

None appears for the respondent, though served.

¶10

By way of this application, the applicant is seeking transfer of the proceedings of dissolution of marriage filed before the Civil Judge Senior Division, Udgir, Dist. Latur to Civil Judge Senior Division, Ambajogai, Dist. Beed.

¶11

The learned counsel for the applicant submits that it is not possible for the applicant to attend the proceedings by travelling from Beed to Latur.

¶12

The learned counsel for the respondent submits that the application is frivolous. The applicant is able bodied person and is in a position to attend the proceedings at Udgir. She has suppressed material facts. The conduct of the applicant was objectionable. No discretion can be exercised in her favour.

¶13

¶14

I have considered rival submissions. I record following

¶15

findings :

¶16

i. It is inconvenient for the applicant to travel and attend the proceedings at Udgir.

¶17

ii. She has no source of income and she is staying with her parents.

¶18

iii. Her sufferings and hardship are apparent.

¶19

iv. There is nothing on record to show that the respondent is unable to attend the proceedings by travelling from Udgir to Ambajogai.

¶20

v. The applicant has initiated complaint at Ambajogai against the respondent.

¶21

A useful reference can be made to the law laid down by the Supreme Court and this Court in the following matters :

¶22

a) Sumita Singh Versus Kumar Sanjay , 2002 AIR (SC) 396 ;

¶23

b) Soma Choudhury Versus Gourab Choudhaury , (2004) 13 Supreme Court Cases 462 ;

¶24

c) Sangamitra Ramakant Royalwar Versus Ramakant Gangaram Royalwar , 2009 (1) Mh.L.J. 303 ;

¶25

d) Anita Balkrishna Barge Versus Balkrishna Sopan Barge , 2011 (1) Mh.L.J. 518 ;

¶26

e) Mahadevi Gopal Mehetre Versus Gopal Prabhakar Mehetre , 2016 (4) All.M.R. 599 ;

¶27

¶28

f) Vaishali Shridhar Jagtap Versus Shridhar Vishwanath Jagtap , 2016 AIR (SC) 3584 ;

¶29

g) Pooja Rohan Jadhav Vresus Rohan Ramesh Jadhav , order passed by High Court, Bench at Aurangabad in MCA No. 171 of 2018 ;

¶30

h) Ashwini Kailas Patil Versus Shivajirao Anandrao Gaekwar , order passed by High Court, Bench at Aurangabad in MCA No. 46 of 2020 .

¶31

For the reasons stated above, I pass following order :

¶32

ORDER

¶33

i. The Miscellaneous Civil Application is allowed.

¶34

ii. The H.M.P. No. 126 of 2018 pending before the Civil Judge Senior Division, Udgir, shall stand transferred to the Civil Judge Senior Division, Ambajogai.

¶35

iii. An endeavour be made to decide the proceedings finally as expeditiously as possible.

¶36

iv. The concern Court shall transmit the papers immediately.

¶37

v. The parties to appear before the Court at Aurangabad on 10^th January, 2024.

¶38

vi. All the proceedings pending at a place where the applicant is residing be preferably posted on same date.

¶39

[ SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J. ]

¶40

Thakur-Chauhan/-