Allowed¶27

Komal Nitin Chavan v. Nitin Laxman Chavan

Bombay HC17 Apr 2026MCA/119/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Wife's transfer application allowed: husband's Section 9 Hindu Marriage Act petition (Petition No.122/2023) pending at Omerga transferred to the Family Court at Latur; hardship to wife with no source of income; Section 24 CPC ends-of-justice principle; concurrent proceedings under Section 498-A IPC and Section 12 of the Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act pending at Latur; N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs. A. S. Saravana Karthik Sha, AIR Online 2022 SC 1268 applied; single judge Abhay J. Mantri; decided 17-04-2026; no order as to costs.

What did the court decide?

Transfer of Petition No.122/2023 from the learned Civil Judge Senior Division, Omerga to the Family Court at Latur, in terms of prayer clause C; Application disposed of with no order as to costs. ¶27

Komal Nitin Chavan vs Nitin Laxman Chavan — Domestic Violence | Bombay HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Transfer of Petition No.122/2023 from the learned Civil Judge Senior Division, Omerga to the Family Court at Latur, in terms of prayer clause C; Application disposed of with no order as to costs.

¶27

Issue for consideration

Whether Petition No.122/2023 filed by the Respondent/husband under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, pending before the learned Civil Judge Senior Division, Omerga, should be transferred to the Family Court at Latur on the ground of hardship to the Applicant-wife.

¶13

Court's answer

The Applicant-wife has no source of income and it is inconvenient for her to travel to and attend proceedings at Omerga (stated to be 85 km from Latur); she would have to endure hardship and suffering, so the ends of justice demand transfer of the proceedings to Latur.

¶26

Ratio / Principle

In view of the dictum of the Hon'ble Apex Court in N.C.V. Aishwarya (supra), it is appropriate to allow the Application; the Application is allowed in terms of prayer clause C and disposed of with no order as to costs.

¶27

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Transfer of matrimonial proceeding - Application by wife for transfer of husband's Petition No.122/2023 under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act from the learned Civil Judge Senior Division, Omerga to the Family Court at Latur, the transfer power being considered under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure - Wife has no source of income; Omerga is 85 km away from Latur where she resides at her parents' house; her complaint under Section 498-A of the IPC and proceeding under Section 12 of the Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act are pending before the JMFC, Latur; Respondent filed no reply - Held, applying the dictum in N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs. A. S. Saravana Karthik Sha, AIR Online 2022 SC 1268, that the ends of justice should demand transfer and that in matrimonial matters proceedings should be transferred to the place where the wife resides to avoid inconvenience to her, the Application is allowed in terms of prayer clause C and disposed of; no order as to costs (Abhay J. Mantri, J.).

¶1

2026:BHC-AUG:16825

¶2

(1) 923miscapln119.14.odt

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

923 MISC.CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 119 OF 2024

KOMAL NITIN CHAVAN

….Applicant

VERSUS

NITIN LAXMAN CHAVAN

…..Respondent

Mr. Kalyane Madhav Nivruttee, Advocate for the applicant

¶11

CORAM : ABHAY J. MANTRI, J. DATE : 17^th APRIL, 2026

¶12

PER COURT :

¶13

The Applicant has filed this Application seeking transfer of Petition No.122/2023 from the learned Civil Judge Senior Division, Omerga, to the Family Court at Latur.

¶14

Heard the learned Advocate for the Applicant.

¶15

None appeared for the Respondent when called out

¶16

either in the Court hall or through VC mode. Perused the record.

¶17

It appears that on 10-02-2025, Mr. A. P. Avhad, learned Advocate, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. It further appears that till this date, the Respondent has not filed a reply to the Application. The fact itself indicates that the Respondent has no grievance about the averments made in the Application.

¶18

1 of 3

¶19

(2)

¶20

923miscapln119.14.odt

¶21

The Applicant got married to the Respondent on 27-012023. In July 2023, the Applicant left the respondent's company and has since been residing at her parents' house. It is also contended that the Applicant has filed a complaint under Section 498-A of the IPC against the Respondent, and the same is pending at Latur. During pendency of this Application the Applicant has also filed proceeding under Section 12 of the Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act against the Respondent at Judicial Magistrate First Class, Latur and both the proceedings are pending before the JMFC, Latur and therefore, it is contended that the proceedings filed by the husband/Respondent at Omerga under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act be transferred at Latur as the Applicant has no source of income. It is inconvenient for her to attend the court proceedings in Omerga, which is 85 km away from Latur. Therefore, the Applicant has moved this application.

¶22

The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the Case of N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs. A. S. Saravana Karthik Sha reported in AIR Online 2022 SC 1268 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 suit, appeal or other proceeding. In matrimonial matters, wherever courts are called upon to consider the plea of transfer, they must take into account the

¶23

2 of 3

¶24

(3) 923miscapln119.14.odt

¶25

economic soundness of both parties, the social strata of the spouses, their behavioural patterns, their standard of life before and after the marriage, and the circumstances. The court also has to exercise interference when one proceeding is pending before one court and another proceeding is pending before another court; in such events, it would be appropriate to transfer all proceedings to one court to avoid inconvenience to the wife. Apart from that, the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in a catena of judgments, has held that it would be appropriate to transfer the proceedings to the place where the wife resides to avoid causing her any inconvenience.

¶26

Having considered the above facts that the Applicant has no income source and it is inconvenient for the Applicant to travel and attend the proceedings at Omerga , it apparently indicates that she will have to endure hardship and suffering. Consequently, in view of the dictum laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the Case of Aishwarya (supra), in my opinion, it would be appropriate to allow the Application.

¶27

As a result, the Application is allowed in terms of the prayer

¶28

clause C.

¶29

The Application is disposed of. No order as to costs.

¶30

[ABHAY J. MANTRI, J. ]

¶31

VishalK/923miscapln119.14.odt

¶32

3 of 3

Komal Nitin Chavan v. Nitin Laxman Chavan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Komal Nitin Chavan v. Nitin Laxman Chavan

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

Kiran Laxman Rathod vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Ramchandra So Vikram Thite vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Navjyotsingh Gangansigh Granthi vs Gurvindar Kaur W/O Navjyotsingh Granthi

Vinod Namdar Tadvi vs Shamimbee W/O Vinod Tadvi and Others

Kalyani Chetan Jadhav vs Chetan Vamanrao Jadhav

Balaji Eknath Bhumare vs the State of Maharashtra