Allowed¶19

Sanskruti W/O Omkar Waghmare v. Omkar S/O Pramod Waghmare

Bombay HC19 Jun 2025MCA/248/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Transfer of proceedings; Family Court Bandra Mumbai to Family Court Nagpur; Miscellaneous Civil Application; Bombay High Court Nagpur Bench; Section 498 of the I.P.C. complaint; 498-A anticipatory bail police-station condition; maintenance proceedings before J.M.F.C. Court Nagpur; applicant residing at Nagpur; non-applicant residing in U.S.A.; convenience of parties; video conferencing appearance; application allowed and disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Transfer of the proceedings pending before the Family Court Bandra, Mumbai to the Family Court at Nagpur; application disposed of. ¶19

Sanskruti W/O Omkar Waghmare vs Omkar S/O Pramod Waghmare — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

1 mca248.2025.odt

¶2

2025:BHC-NAG:6954

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR

¶4

MISCELLANEOUS CIVIL APPLICATION NO.248/2025

¶5

(Sanskruti W/o Omkar Waghmare Vs. Omkar S/o Pramod Waghamre)

¶6

¶7

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions

¶8

Court's or Judge's orders

¶9

and Registrar's orders

¶10

- - - - ------------------------------------ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mr. Muzammil Husain, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. Arvind Tiwari, Advocate for the non-applicant.

¶11

CORAM: MRS.VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, J. DATED: 18.7.2025.

¶12

Heard.

¶13

The applicant has filed this application to transfer the proceedings from Family Court Bandra, Mumbai to Family Court at Nagpur.

¶14

The learned Advocate for the applicant has stated that in Nagpur Court she has filed maintenance proceedings and a complaint under Section 498 of the I.P.C. which are pending before J.M.F.C. Court. The non-applicant is staying in U.S.A. He will be at Nagpur on 1^st August, 2025 as he has to attend the police station as a condition of anticipatory bail in 498-A proceedings. Hence prayed to allow the application.

¶15

The learned Advocate for the non-applicant has stated that it will be convenient for him to attend the Court at Bandra, Mumbai whenever required. Hence prayed to reject the application.

¶16

Heard both Advocates.

¶17

The applicant is staying at Nagpur. The non-applicant is ready to attend the Court at Bandra whenever required. Though he is staying in U.S.A. he can attend the Court in Nagpur also as he has to attend the other two proceedings. Therefore, if the same date is

¶18

2 mca248.2025.odt

¶19

taken, then it will be convenient for him to attend the Court at Nagpur in all the three matters. He can also appear through video conferencing. Therefore, the matter which is pending before the Family Court Bandra, Mumbai is transferred to Family Court at Nagpur. Application stands disposed of.

¶20

Tambaskar.

¶21

Signed by: MR. N.V. TAMBASKAR Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 19/07/2025 17:50:14

Sanskruti W/O Omkar Waghmare v. Omkar S/O Pramod Waghmare

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanskruti W/O Omkar Waghmare v. Omkar S/O Pramod Waghmare

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Hemantkumar Pandharinath Bhandarkar vs the State of Maharashtra Thr Pso Ps Bhandara Dist. Bhandara and Another

Neeraj S/O Naresh Agrawal vs the State of Maharashtra Thr Pso Ps Bhandara Tq. and Dist. Bhandara and Another

Pomesh S/O Jagdishprasad Agrawal vs the State of Maharashtra Thr Pso Ps Bhandara Tq. and Dist. Bhandara and Another

The State of Maharashtra Thr. Dean, Indira Gandhi Medical College and Hospital, Nagpur and Others Vs Smt. Nalu Wd/O Vilas Shende

Darshan S/O Prakashchand Dugad vs the State of Maharashtra Thr Pso Ps Imaamwada, Nagpur Dist. Nagpur

Sau. Pooja W/O Raju Chandekar vs Raju S/O Vasantrao Chandekar