Sushma Suresh Kamble vs Suresh Tillu Kamble — Maintenance and Alimony | Bombay HC (2026)

Sushma Suresh Kamble vs Suresh Tillu Kamble — Maintenance and Alimony | Bombay HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Transfer of Marriage Petition No. 181 of 2024 from the Court of the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Ratnagiri to the Family Court at Thane, to be effected within four weeks; the Advocate for the Applicant permitted, and the Registrar (Judicial-I) directed, to communicate the order to the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Ratnagiri.

Issue for consideration

Whether the Respondent's Divorce Petition (Marriage Petition No. 181 of 2024) pending before the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Ratnagiri should be transferred to the Family Court at Thane, on the Applicant-wife's ground that she resides at Thane and attending proceedings at Ratnagiri would require travel of approximately 300 kilometres.

Court's answer

Considering the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in N.C.V. Aishwarya vs. Saravana Karthik Sha, and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the present case, a case is made out to allow the Miscellaneous Civil Application seeking transfer of the Respondent's Divorce Petition to the Family Court at Thane.

Ratio / Principle

The proceedings in Marriage Petition No. 181 of 2024 pending before the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Ratnagiri shall be transferred within four weeks to the Family Court at Thane.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court (Civil Appellate Jurisdiction), Misc. Civil Application No. 66 of 2025 (decided 27 January 2026, Rajesh S. Patil, J.) — Wife's transfer application allowed: Marriage Petition No. 181 of 2024 (husband's Divorce Petition) pending before the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Ratnagiri transferred to the Family Court at Thane within four weeks. Applicant-wife resides at Thane (maternal uncle's chawl), works there as a 'Care Taker', and travelling approx. 300 km to Ratnagiri would prevent same-day return; the Respondent-husband, retired under VRS from the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and drawing pension, faced no comparable hardship. Office remark recorded failure of mediation, with the Learned Mediator reporting the Respondent's no-objection to transfer (from Ratnagiri to Mumbai). Respondent contended that proceedings having reached the evidence stage should not be moved and the Applicant could attend via video conferencing; the Court nevertheless allowed the application relying on N.C.V. Aishwarya vs. Saravana Karthik Sha, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1199. The Applicant separately runs a Section 125 CrPC maintenance proceeding at Thane alleging arrears of Rs. 5 lakhs. Application allowed in terms of prayer clause (b) and disposed of.

39-MCA-66-2025.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 66 OF 2025

Digitally signed by SHRADDHA SHRADDHA KAMLESH KAMLESH TALEKAR TALEKAR Date: 2026.01.28 19:45:37 +0530

Sushma Suresh Kamble …Applicant Versus Suresh Tillu Kamble …Respondent

Ms. Neha R. Parte i/b Yuwraj Patil, for Applicant. Mr. Santosh Maske , for Respondent.

CORAM : RAJESH S. PATIL, J. Date : 27^th January, 2026

P C :

The office remark indicates that the mediation has failed. In

the office report, the Learned Mediator has stated that the Respondent has no objection if the Divorce Petition is transferred from Ratnagiri to Mumbai.

By the present Transfer Application, the Applicant, who is the wife of the Respondent, seeks transfer of the Respondent’s Divorce Petition from the Court of the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Ratnagiri to the Family Court at Thane. It is the case of the Applicant that she is residing at Thane and, to attend the proceedings at Ratnagiri, she would

be required to travel approximately 300 kilometres. Therefore, it would Page 1 of 3 27^th January, 2026

Shraddha

39-MCA-66-2025.doc

be difficult for her to travel to Ratnagiri to attend the Court proceedings and return on the same day. The Applicant is residing at her maternal uncle’s house in a chawl at Thane and is working as a “Care Taker” at Thane. The Respondent has taken Voluntary Retirement Scheme (VRS) from the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and is receiving pension. Therefore, it would not be difficult for him to attend the Court proceedings if the same are transferred to Thane. The Applicant has also filed proceedings under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1963 before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Thane, as the Respondent failed to pay the arrears of maintenance. According to the Applicant, the arrears of maintenance as on date are Rs. 5 lakhs. The proceedings before the Ratnagiri Court are being conducted in the absence of the Applicant. Hence, the said proceedings are required to be transferred to the Family Court at Thane.

On behalf of the Respondent, it is submitted that since the proceedings have reached the stage of evidence, the same ought not to be transferred at this stage and that the Applicant can attend the proceedings through video conferencing.

Page 2 of 3 27^th January, 2026

Shraddha

39-MCA-66-2025.doc

Considering the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court

in the case of N.C.V. Aishwarya vs. Saravana Karthik Sha¹ , and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the present case, a case is made out to allow the Miscellaneous Civil Application.

The Miscellaneous Civil Application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (b).

The proceedings in Marriage Petition No. 181 of 2024 pending before the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Ratnagiri shall be transferred within four weeks to the Family Court at Thane.

The Advocate for the Applicant is permitted to communicate this order to the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Ratnagiri. The Registrar (Judicial-I) shall also communicate this order to the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Ratnagiri by email.

The Miscellaneous Civil Application is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

[ RAJESH S. PATIL, J.]

1 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1199

Page 3 of 3 27^th January, 2026

Shraddha