Allowed¶14

Vaishnavi Lakhna Kadewar v. Lakhan Kailas Kadewar

Bombay HC22 Sept 2025MCA/97/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Misc. Civil Application No. 97 of 2025 (mca97.25), High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Aurangabad Bench, Kishore C. Sant, J., decided 22.09.2025 - wife's application for transfer of HMP No. A-174 of 2024 from the Family Court, Jalna to the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Omerga allowed on account of her residence at Omerga with her mother and inability to travel unaccompanied; PWDVA No. 219 of 2025 already pending at Omerga; directions regarding avoidance of unnecessary adjournments and favourable consideration of the husband's video-conference appearance; advocates D.S. Mali for the applicant and Vaibhav Kulkarni for the respondent.

What did the court decide?

Transfer of HMP No. A-174 of 2024 from the Family Court, Jalna to the Court of learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Omerga, in terms of prayer clause (B). ¶14

Vaishnavi Lakhna Kadewar Vs Lakhan Kailas Kadewar — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

2025:BHC-AUG:25970

¶2

( 1 ) mca97.25

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

44 MISC.CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 97 OF 2025

¶5

VAISHNAVI LAKHNA KADEWAR VERSUS LAKHAN KAILAS KADEWAR

¶6

Mr. D.S. Mali, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. Vaibhav Kulkarni, Advocate for the respondent.

¶7

CORAM : KISHORE C. SANT, J. DATE : 22.09.2025

¶8

PC :-

¶9

Learned Advocate for the respondent undertakes to file Vakalatnama within a period of two weeks from today.

¶10

Heard learned Advocates for the parties. This application is filed for transfer of HMP No. A-174 of 2024, pending in the Court of learned Judge, Family Court, Jalna to the Court of learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Omerga. The applicant is a wife. She lost her father long back and presently she is residing with her mother at Omerga. It is submitted that she is not in a position to undertake travel to attend the proceeding at Jalna. One proceeding is already pending in Omerga, bearing PWDVA No. 219 of 2025. Learned Advocate for the applicant, therefore, submits that this is a fit case to allow the application by transferring the proceeding to the Court at Omerga.

¶11

Learned Advocate for the respondent vehemently opposes the application. He submits that Court at Jalna is a proper Court of

¶12

jurisdiction. If he is required to travel to Omerga, he will lose his income for the day.

¶13

Considering the fact that the wife is residing at Omerga with her mother and there is no one to accompany her to come to Jalna, this Court finds it reasonable to allow the application.

¶14

This Misc. Civil Application is, therefore allowed in terms of prayer clause (B). After transfer of the proceeding, wife shall not seek unnecessary adjournments. If the Trial Court comes to a conclusion that wife is unnecessary asking for adjournments, the Trial Court may pass appropriate orders compensating the husband, if he personally remains present. Request of husband for appearing through video conference shall also be considered favourably by the Trial Court.

¶15

[KISHORE C. SANT, J.]

¶16

snk/2025/Sep25/mca97.25

Vaishnavi Lakhna Kadewar v. Lakhan Kailas Kadewar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vaishnavi Lakhna Kadewar v. Lakhan Kailas Kadewar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sandhyaben Ishwarlal Parekh. Vs Santosh Onkar Bagale and Others.

Shaikh Abdul Sattar Hasanbhai. Vs Bismillahbee Wazir Shaikh.

The State of Maharashtra and Others Vs Kokilabai Pralhad Patil

Shrirampur Municipal Council Emp.Co.Op Society Vs State of Maharashtra and Others

Yashoda Balraj Gaud (Died) Thr Lrs. Dindayal Balraj Gaud Vs Nabi Gulabsab Motole and Ors.

Gangadhar Virprakashappa Swami(Mathwale) Vs Mazuroddin Moinuddin and Anr.