Single judge allowed an application seeking transfer of divorce proceedings from Nashik to Dhule Family Court, holding that the wife's convenience and hardship must be preferred over the husband's in matrimonial matters.
Divorce Petition filed before Family Court, Nashik, to be transferred to Family Court, Dhule.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
3-MCA-326-2022.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
MISCELLANEOUS CIVIL APPLICATION NO.326 OF 2022
BHAGYASHRI @ PURUVI RANJIT PATIL)...APPLICANT
V/s.
RANJIT DILIP PATIL)...RESPONDENT
Mr. Anilkumar K. Patil a/w Mr. Manish K., Ms. Zeel Jain, Advocate for
the Applicant.
None for the Respondent.
CORAM:ABHAY AHUJA, J.
DATE:15th DECEMBER, 2023
P.C. :
1.Today when the matter is called out, Mr.Patil, learned Counsel for
the Applicant, would submit that although as recorded by earlier
orders, notice has been served on the Respondent, however, none
appears. Learned Counsel, therefore, urges this Court to hear this
Application submitting that sufficient opportunity has been granted to
the Respondent to appear.
AVK 1/7
3-MCA-326-2022.doc
2.Mr.Patil would submit that by this Application, the Applicant is
seeking transfer of Divorce proceedings filed by the Respondent-
husband in the Family Court at Nashik to the Family Court at Dhule.
Learned Counsel would submit that marriage between the Applicant
and the Respondent was solemnized on 2nd June 2006 as per Hindu
rituals at Dhule. That, out of the said wedlock, in the year 2007 and in
the year 2012 respectively, two daughters were born who are in the
care and custody of the Applicant. Learned Counsel submits that in the
year 2017, the Applicant was compelled to leave the matrimonial home
of the Respondent after which on 5th September 2020, the Respondent-
husband sent a legal notice to the Applicant for divorce which was
replied to and an offer to stay together was also made, however, the
same did not materialize, and therefore, in October 2020, the Applicant
filed complaint before Mahila Takrar Nivaran Kendra, Dhule. In
November 2020, the Applicant filed an Application under the
Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, before the
Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Dhule. Thereafter, on 3rd November
2020, the Applicant received summons of the Respondent’s Divorce
Petition filed before the Family Court, Nashik. That, the Applicant has
been forcibly removed from the house of the Respondent along with
her daughters and physical torture has been meted out to her, and
AVK 2/7
3-MCA-326-2022.doc
therefore, the Applicant, left with no choice, had to go and stay with
her parents at Dhule.
3. Learned Counsel would submit that the distance between Nashik and Dhule is around 150 kilometers. That it takes approximately 3 to 4 hours to reach Nashik. It is not possible for the Applicant to return home on the same day after attending Court proceedings at Nashik.
4.Learned Counsel submits that the Applicant has a diploma in
Fine Arts and conducts tuitions by which she earns her daily bread and
butter to take care of herself and her daughters. Learned Counsel
submits that the Applicant’s parents are old and unable to support her
in any manner. That, the two children are school going and their entire
up-keep is the responsibility of the Applicant. That, in the
circumstances of the case, where she is living at the mercy of her
parents, who are old and aged and retired and with meagre source of
income and with nobody to accompany her to Nashik, the travel from
Nashik to Dhule every time the matter is listed in the Court would not
only be inconvenient but also cause undue hardship. Learned Counsel
submits that this Court consider the inconvenience and hardship of the
Applicant and allow the Application.
AVK 3/7
3-MCA-326-2022.doc
5.Learned Counsel would submit that the stage at which this Court
had granted stay in respect of the proceedings in Nashik was a very
nascent stage, as this Application was filed soon after the summons was
received. Learned Counsel would submit that on the other hand, the
Respondent-husband is a mechanical engineer working at Nashik and
drawing a handsome salary and it would not be inconvenient for him to
come and attend the proceedings at Dhule, as he is already attending
the Domestic Violence proceedings there.
6.Mr.Patil draws the attention of this Court to the decisions of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs. A.S.
Saravana Karthik Sha1 and also in the case of Rajani Kishor Pardeshi vs.
Kishor Babulal Pardeshi2and submits that in cases of this nature, the
convenience of wife has to be considered and also that the convenience
of the wife has to be preferred over the convenience of the husband.
7. I have heard Mr.Patil, learned Counsel for the Applicant and considered the submissions made by him as also the reply filed by the Respondent.
1 AIR 2022 SC 4318
2 2005 (12) SCC 237
AVK 4/7
3-MCA-326-2022.doc
8.It is observed that despite Vakalatnama of two Advocates having
filed on behalf of the Respondent, none has been appearing in the
matter, although reply has been filed in the matter. A perusal of the
reply indicates that the reply proceeds merely on the basis of denials
and counter allegations of desertion. There is also an offer to pay for
the travel expenses, however, none appears for the Respondent despite
service of notice and several opportunities. This Court has perused the
reply and is of the view that there is no substantial defence made
against the allegations and submissions made in the Application. As
pointed out by the learned Counsel for the Applicant, it is the
convenience of the wife that has to be considered and preferred over
the convenience of the husband.
9.The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of N. C. V. Aishwarya Vs.
A. S. Saravana Karthik Sha (supra),has observed 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
proceedings. That in matrimonial matters wherever Courts are called
upon to consider the plea of transfer, the Courts have to take into
consideration the economic soundness of both the parties, the social
strata of the spouses and their behavioural pattern, their standard of
AVK 5/7
3-MCA-326-2022.doc
life prior to the marriage and subsequent thereto and the circumstances
of both the parties in eking out their livelihood and under whose
protective umbrella they are seeking their sustenance. 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.
10.In the case of Rajani Kishor Pardeshi Vs. Kishor Babulal Pardeshi
(supra), the Hon’ble Supreme Court while considering the convenience
of the husband and the convenience of the wife, observed that it is the
convenience of the wife that has to be preferred over the convenience
of the husband.
11.Considering the above facts, this Court is of the view that ends of
justice would be met if the Divorce Petition filed by the Respondent-
husband before the Family Court at Nashik is transferred to Family
Court, Dhule.
12.The Application is made absolute in terms of Prayer clause (b)
which reads thus :
AVK 6/7
3-MCA-326-2022.doc
“(b)This Hon’ble Court be pleased to transfer
proceedings viz. Divorce Petition A-378/2020 filed by the
Respondent husband before Family Court, Nashik under
Section 13(1)(i-a) and (i-b) for Dissolution of Marriage to
Family Court, Dhule.”
13.It is made clear that any observation(s) 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 Divorce proceedings
which is to be tried and decided on its own merits uninfluenced by the
said observation(s).
(ABHAY AHUJA, J.)
ARTI VILAS KHATATE
Digitally signed by ARTI VILAS KHATATE Date: 2023.12.18 10:52:45 +0530
AVK 7/7
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the Divorce proceedings filed in Family Court, Nashik, should be transferred to Family Court, Dhule, considering the wife's hardship.
Whether the convenience of the wife must be preferred over the convenience of the husband in transfer applications.
Whether the ends of justice demand transfer of matrimonial proceedings to a court nearer to the wife's residence.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs. A.S. Saravana Karthik ShaExplained¶30
AIR 2022 SC 4318 · Who else cites this
Rajani Kishor Pardeshi vs. Kishor Babulal PardeshiExplained¶34
2005 (12) SCC 237 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Baghyashri @ Puruvi Ranjit Patil
Ranjit Dilip Patil
Abhay Ahuja
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court