Allowed¶30

Sakshi Shreyas Tapase v. Shreyas Nilkhanth Tapase

Bombay HC27 Jun 2025MCA/128/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Transfer of matrimonial proceeding; wife's convenience; Section 9 Hindu Marriage Act 1955 application; Marriage Petition No. 54 of 2023; Family Court Satara to CJSD Dhule; ~450 Km distance; homemaker wife; DV proceedings before JMFC Dhule; Section 498A IPC complaint Police Station Dhule; respondent absent despite service (last occasion 08.10.2025); reliance on N. C. V. Aishwarya vs. A. S. Sarvana Karthik Sha, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1199; Section 24 CPC transfer power; MCA 128 of 2025; Bombay High Court; Rajesh S. Patil, J.; decided 07.11.2025; application allowed; transfer directed within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Transfer of Marriage Petition No. 54 of 2023 from the Family Court, Satara to the CJSD, Dhule, in terms of prayer clause (b), to be effected within four weeks. ¶30

Sakshi Shreyas Tapase vs Shreyas Nilkhanth Tapase — Dowry and Cruelty | Bombay HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Transfer of Marriage Petition No. 54 of 2023 from the Family Court, Satara to the CJSD, Dhule, in terms of prayer clause (b), to be effected within four weeks.

¶30

Issue for consideration

Whether the transfer Application filed by the applicant-wife should be allowed, i.e., whether the Application filed by the Respondent-husband under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (Marriage Petition No. 54 of 2023) pending before the Family Court, Satara should be transferred to the CJSD, Dhule, considering the convenience of the wife.

¶17

Court's answer

Considering the law laid down by the Supreme Court in N. C. V. Aishwarya (Supra) and the facts of the present proceedings, the Court was convinced that a case is made out to allow the transfer Application.

¶29

Ratio / Principle

The Miscellaneous Civil Application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (b) of the Application.

¶30

Key takeaways

Marriage Petition No. 54 of 2023 pending before the Family Court, Satara shall be transferred to the CJSD, Dhule within a period of four weeks.ratio¶31

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court (Civil Appellate Jurisdiction), Rajesh S. Patil, J., 07.11.2025 — Miscellaneous Civil Application No. 128 of 2025. Sakshi Shreyas Tapase (applicant-wife, homemaker residing with her parents at Dhule) sought transfer of her husband Shreyas Nilkanth Tapase's Application under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (Marriage Petition No. 54 of 2023) pending before the Family Court, Satara to the CJSD, Dhule. Grounds: the Respondent has business at Satara; the applicant has filed D.V. proceedings before the JMFC, Dhule and a Section 498A IPC Application before the Police Station, Dhule; the approximately 450 Km distance makes same-day travel to Satara impracticable and no family member or friend can accompany her. The Respondent, though duly served, did not appear on 08.10.2025 or on the hearing date, so the hearing proceeded in his absence. Relying on N. C. V. Aishwarya vs. A. S. Sarvana Karthik Sha, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1199 (generally the wife's convenience must be looked at while considering transfer in matrimonial matters), the Court held a case was made out, allowed the Miscellaneous Civil Application in terms of prayer clause (b), and directed transfer of the Marriage Petition to the CJSD, Dhule within four weeks.

¶1

MCA 128-2025.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

MISCELLANEOUS CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 128 OF 2025

¶4

ANAND SUDHAKAR SUDAME

¶5

Digitally signed by ANAND SUDHAKAR SUDAME Date: 2025.11.11 12:30:24 +0530

¶6

Sakshi Shreyas Tapase ..Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

Shreyas Nilkanth Tapase

¶9

..Respondent

¶10

Mr. D. D. Rananaware, Advocate, for the Applicant

¶11

CORAM : RAJESH S. PATIL, J.

¶12

DATE : 07.11.2025

¶13

P. C.

¶14

None appears for the Respondent when the matter is called out.

¶15

2, Even on the last occasion i. e. 08.10.2025, none appeared for the Respondent though he was duly served.

¶16

It appears that the Respondent is not interested in opposing the present transfer Application. Therefore, in the absence of the Respondent, I am proceeding further with the hearing of the transfer Application.

¶17

The Applicant is the wife of the Respondent who is seeking transfer of the Application filed under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 by the Respondent - husband before the Family Court, Satara to the CJSD, Dhule. It is her case that the Respondent has business at Satara. She is staying with her parents at Dhule. She is a homemaker.

¶18

1 of 3

¶19

Anand

¶20

MCA 128-2025.doc

¶21

She has filed a D. V. proceedings before the JMFC, Dhule and has also filed an Application under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 before the Police Station, Dhule. The distance between Dhule and Satara is around 450 Km and it is inconvenient for her to travel to Satara for attending the Court proceedings and return back on the same day. There is no body who can accompany her from her family or friend to attend the Court proceedings.

¶22

The Supreme Court in the case of N. C. V. Aishwarya vs. A. S. Sarvana Karthik Sha , reported in 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1199 has held that while considering transfer proceedings, convenience of the wife has to be taken into consideration. Paragraph 9 of the said Judgment

¶23

reads as under :-

¶24

“9. The cardinal principle for exercise of power under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure is that the ends of justice should demand transfer of the suit, appeal or other proceeding. 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 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 to life. 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.”

(emphasis supplied)

2 of 3

Anand

MCA 128-2025.doc

¶29

Considering the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of N. C. V. Aishwarya (Supra) and facts of the present proceedings, I am convinced that a case is made out to allow the Application.

¶30

The Miscellaneous Civil Application is allowed in terms prayer clause (b) .

¶31

The proceeding, being Marriage Petition No. 54 of 2023 pending before the Family Court, Satara be transferred to the CJSD, Dhule within a period of four weeks from today.

¶32

(RAJESH S. PATIL, J.)

¶33

3 of 3

¶34

Anand

Sakshi Shreyas Tapase v. Shreyas Nilkhanth Tapase

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sakshi Shreyas Tapase v. Shreyas Nilkhanth Tapase

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Bhavesh S/O Hasmukhbhai Vasa vs Nisha Bhavesh Vasa

Mrs. Suvarna Neelkanth Kulkarni vs Mr.Neelkant C Kulkarni

Akanksha Clarence Figer ails Akanksha Sudhir Sawant vs Clarence Fracis Figer

Bhavika Sagar Motwani vs Sagar Ashok Motwani

Babita Pravin Malkani vs Pravin Harkishan Malkani

Kotak Mahindra Bank vs Opal Asia India Private Limited and 2 Others