Allowed¶21

Snehal Sumit Ingale v. Sumit Vinayak Ingale

Bombay HC7 Apr 2026MCA/258/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Transfer of matrimonial/divorce proceedings; Section 24 Code of Civil Procedure; ends of justice; convenience and hardship of wife; no income source; 325 km travel; financial burden; multiplicity of litigation; Family Court Jalgaon to C.J.S.D. Beed; Section 9 Hindu Marriage Act restitution of conjugal rights; domestic violence proceedings J.M.F.C. Patoda; N.C.V. Aishwarya v. A.S. Saravana Karthik Sha AIR Online 2022 SC 1268; Snehal Sumit Ingale v. Sumit Vinayak Ingale; MCA 258 of 2025; Aurangabad Bench; Abhay J. Mantri J.

What did the court decide?

Transfer of the divorce proceeding, Petition No. A-57 of 2025, from the learned Family Court, Jalgaon to the Court of learned C.J.S.D., Beed, in terms of prayer clause (B); Miscellaneous Civil Application disposed of with no order as to costs. ¶21

Snehal Sumit Ingale vs Sumit Vinayak Ingale — Matrimonial and Divorce | Bombay HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶21

Issue for consideration

Whether the divorce proceeding, Petition No. A-57 of 2025, pending before the learned Family Court, Jalgaon, should be transferred to the Court of C.J.S.D., Beed. +1 more

¶9

Court's answer

In view of the dictum laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the Case of Aishwarya (supra), the court held it appropriate to transfer the divorce proceeding, Petition No. A-57 of 2025, pending before the learned Family Court, Jalgaon, to the Court of learned C.J.S.D., Beed.

¶20

Ratio / Principle

The court found that the Applicant has no income source and that it is inconvenient for her to travel to and attend the proceedings at Jalgaon, indicating she would have to endure hardship and suffering.

¶20

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Wife's miscellaneous civil application to transfer the husband's divorce Petition No. A-57 of 2025 from the learned Family Court, Jalgaon to the Court of C.J.S.D., Beed allowed (Abhay J. Mantri, J., Bombay HC, Aurangabad Bench, 21-04-2026). The parties married on 31-01-2020 at Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar; the Applicant was driven out of the matrimonial home in April 2022 and lives at Amalner. She had filed domestic violence proceedings at J.M.F.C., Patoda and a Section 9 Hindu Marriage Act restitution-of-conjugal-rights petition at C.J.S.D., Beed; the Respondent countered with the Jalgaon divorce petition. Finding that the Applicant has no income source and that travelling about 325 km to Jalgaon would cause hardship and financial burden, and applying the dictum in N.C.V. Aishwarya v. A.S. Saravana Karthik Sha, AIR Online 2022 SC 1268 (ends of justice as the cardinal principle for exercise of power under Section 24 CPC; consolidation of proceedings pending in different courts; preference for the wife's location), the court allowed the transfer in terms of prayer clause (B). Application disposed of; no order as to costs.

¶1

933-MCA-258-25.odt

¶2

2026:BHC-AUG:18236

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

MISCELLANEOUS CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 258 OF 2025

¶5

Snehal Sumit Ingale ..APPLICANT VERSUS Sumit Vinayak Ingale ..RESPONDENT

¶6

Mr. S.B. Choudhari, Advocate for Applicant Mr. V.S. Undre, Advocate for Respondent

¶7

CORAM : ABHAY J. MANTRI, J. DATE : 21^st APRIL, 2026

¶8

PER COURT :

¶9

The Applicant, Wife, has moved this Application for the transfer of the divorce proceeding, i.e. Petition No. A-57 of 2025 pending before the learned Family Court, Jalgaon, to the learned C.J.S.D., Beed.

¶10

Heard learned counsel for both parties. Perused the record.

¶11

The marriage between Applicant and Respondent took place on 31^st January, 2020, at Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar. From the said wedlock, one daughter was born to the Applicant. After cohabiting for two years, the Applicant was driven out of the matrimonial house in April 2022, and since then, she has been living at her parents’ house in Amalner. She has also filed domestic violence proceedings in the Court of Learned J.M.F.C., Patoda and

¶12

one proceeding under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of

¶13

1 / 3

¶14

933-MCA-258-25.odt

¶15

conjugal rights in the Court of Learned C. J. S. D., Beed. To counter the same, the Respondent has filed divorce proceedings, i.e. Petition No. A-57 of 2025, before the learned Family Court, Jalgaon. Therefore, the Applicant has preferred this Application to transfer the said proceeding to the Court at Beed.

¶16

It is also contended that the Applicant is residing at Jalgaon. Therefore, it is inconvenient for her to travel to Jalgaon, 325 km away, to attend the divorce proceedings pending there. away. The Applicant is also unable to bear the financial burden of travelling and attending the proceedings at Jalgaon. Similarly, she has filed a proceeding for restitution of conjugal rights before the Court of C.J.S.D., Beed. Therefore, it is contended that it would be appropriate to transfer the proceedings from the learned Family Court, Jalgaon, to the Court of C.J.S.D., Beed, to avoid causing multiplicity of the litigation and inconvenience to her.

¶17

The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the Case of N.C.V. Aishwarya Versus 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 economic soundness of both parties, the social strata of the spouses, their behavioural patterns, their standard of life before and after the 2 / 3

¶18

933-MCA-258-25.odt

¶19

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.

¶20

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 Jalgaon, 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 transfer the divorce proceeding, i.e. Petition No.A-57 of 2025 pending before the learned Family Court, Jalgaon, to the Court of learned C.J.S.D., Beed.

¶21

As a result, Miscellaneous Civil Application is allowed in terms of the prayer clause (B) .

¶22

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

¶23

( ABHAY J. MANTRI, J. )

¶24

SSD

¶25

3 / 3

Snehal Sumit Ingale v. Sumit Vinayak Ingale

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Snehal Sumit Ingale v. Sumit Vinayak Ingale

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

Renuka Nitin Bondre vs Nitin s/o Shriram Bondre

Karuna W/o Trisharan Chahande vs Trisharan S/o Raju Chahande

Jayashree Kiran Shelke vs Kiran Ajay Shelke

Saifulla Abutayyab Shaikh vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Nisha W/O Rakesh Kabadi vs Rakesh S/O Jaggnath Kabadi

Sumedha Shrikant Patil vs Shrikant Jaydeorao Patil