Mrs.Shradha Amar Gosavi vs Mr. Amar Khushalgiri Gosavi

It is the case of the Applicant – wife that earlier, divorce proceeding was filed by the Respondent – husband before the Family Court, Pune (1^st divorce proceeding). Pursuant to the Misc. Civil Application filed by the Applicant – wife, the said proceeding was transferred by an Order dated 23.08.2013 passed by this Court (Coram : Mrs. Roshan Dalvi, J.) in M.C.A. No. 95 of 2013, from the Family Court, Bandra, Mumbai to the Family Court, Nashik. After the proceeding was transferred to the Family Court, Nashik, the same was decided and the divorce proceeding filed by the husband was dismissed and the Application filed for restitution of conjugal rights under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 by the Applicant – wife was allowed.

¶30

7.1 Immediately, thereafter the Respondent – husband filed a divorce proceeding before the Family Court, Nashik (2^nd divorce proceeding). In the said divorce proceeding, by an Order dated 03.01.2024, the Family Court, Nashik held that the Petitioner claims the marriage is a nullity, however, as this ground is not legally available, the Petition is not tenable.

¶31

2 of 5

¶32

Anand

¶33

MCA 265-025.doc

¶34

7.2 Thereafter, the Petitioner filed an Application under Section 9 of

¶35

the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 before the Family Court, Pune. Hence, the Applicant filed the present transfer proceeding seeking transfer of the Application filed under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 from the Family Court, Pune to the Family Court, Nashik. Immediately, on receiving notice of transfer Application, the Respondent – husband withdrew the Application filed under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 before the Family Court, Pune and filed a fresh proceeding seeking divorce before the Family Court, Pune (3^rd divorce proceeding). The Applicant after getting knowledge of the said proceeding sought amendment to the present Misc. Civil Application seeking transfer of the 3^rd divorce proceeding from the Family Court, Pune to the Family Court, Nashik.

¶36

7.3 It is the case of the Applicant that she has no source of income and she is residing at her parents house. The distance between Nashik and Pune is around 280 Km.. Therefore, it will take around six hours to travel from Pune to Nashik. It will be difficult for the Applicant to travel from Pune to attend the Court proceeding at Nashik and return back on the same day. Initiating repeated proceedings by husband, is nothing but harassment of the Applicant. Therefore, she is seeking 3^rd divorce proceeding filed by the Respondent – husband to be

¶37

3 of 5

¶38

Anand

¶39

MCA 265-025.doc

¶40

transferred to the Family Court, Nashik.

¶41

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 deciding transfer proceedings, convenience of the wife has to be taken into consideration. Paragraph 9 of the said Judgment reads as under :-

¶42

“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.”

¶43

(emphasis supplied)

¶44

Considering the law as laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of N. C. V. Aishwarya (Supra) and facts of the present case, where there is not one but at least three divorce proceedings filed by the Respondent – husband and one Section 9 proceeding, I am of the view that this is nothing but harassment of the Applicant. Although duly served, the Respondent chose not to appear in the present proceedings.

¶45

4 of 5

¶46

Anand

¶47

MCA 265-025.doc

¶48

Hence, this Misc. Civil Application requires to be allowed.

¶49

The Misc. Civil Application stands allowed in terms of prayer clause (a) .

¶50

The proceeding, being the Hindu Marriage Petition No. A-1663 of 2025 pending before the Family Court, Pune be transferred to the Family Court, Nashik. Further, costs of Rs.50,000/- is imposed upon the Respondent, to be paid to the Applicant-wife for harassment caused to her, within four weeks from today. Learned Counsel for the Applicant – wife is at liberty to furnish a copy of the today’s Order to the Respondent and learned Counsel for the Respondent in trial Court.

¶51

Registrar (Judicial – I) is hereby directed to communicate the order passed today to the Registrar of the Family Court, Pune by E-mail.

¶52

All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this Order.

¶53

(RAJESH S. PATIL, J.)

¶54

5 of 5

¶55

Anand

Mrs.Shradha Amar Gosavi v. Mr. Amar Khushalgiri Gosavi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mrs.Shradha Amar Gosavi v. Mr. Amar Khushalgiri Gosavi

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

Yes Bank Ltd. vs Mr. Mohammed Azhar

Hdb Financial Services Limited vs Inayat Abdullah Shaikh

Shriram City Union Finance Ltd. vs Ranju Sunil Kumar and Anr.

Viimal Vishnu Yadav vs Rohini Sudhakar Gaikwad

Roshani Sameer Papal vs Sameer Dinkar Papal

Sunita Subhash Gawari vs Subhash Gangaeam Gawari