Allowed

Shanti Harijan v. Bikram Hari

Calcutta HC12 Dec 2022CO/1188/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order deals with an application for the transfer of a matrimonial suit from Malda to Birbhum. The court granted the transfer based on the petitioner's role as a custodian of a child, pending financial cases in Birbhum, and the significant distance between the two jurisdictions.

What did the court decide?

Matrimonial Suit no. 466 of 2019 is to be transferred from the court in Malda to the court of learned Additional District Judge, Bolpur, Birbhum.

Shanti Harijan Vs Bikram Hari — Matrimonial and Divorce | Calcutta HC (2022)

¶1

12.12.2022 183 Ct. no. 652 sb

¶2

C.O. 1188 of 2022 With CAN 2 of 2022

¶3

Shanti Harijan Vs. Bikram Hari

¶4

Mr. Abu Jafor

¶5

Mr. Rameshwar Sinha …for the Petitioner

¶6

Mr. Abir Lal Chakraborty Mr. R. Saha …for the opposite party

¶7

This is an application under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking transfer of Matrimonial Suit no. 466 of 2019 presently pending before the court of learned Additional District Judge, 5^th Court, Malda to the court of learned Additional District Judge, Bolpur, Birbhum.

¶8

The petitioner contended that the petitioner married with the opposite party on 31.7.1996 according to Hindu Rites and Customs. The petitioner further contended that she is an unemployed lady and she is also custodian of a child who is a student of Class-I in a local school at Bolpur. The petitioner has initiated a proceeding seeking maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and another proceeding under the provision of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act and both the cases are pending in

¶9

¶10

the court at Bolpur where the husband has appeared and contesting the same. The distance in between the Bolpur and Malda is about 252 kilometres and the petitioner has none to accompany her in her family. Moreover, the petitioner has to look after her aged parents and as such the petitioner has sought for aforesaid transfer.

¶11

Opposite party raised objection and contended that the grounds for transfer as sough for by the petitioner is not sufficient and as such the prayer made by the petitioner is liable to be rejected.

¶12

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and the distance involved between the two places and that the petitioner is the custodian of a school going child and that the other proceedings under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and proceeding under the provision of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act are pending before the Bolpur court where the opposite party would be required to attend and that in such cases where the husband has initiated a suit for dissolution of marriage, the convenience of the petitioner is of paramount importance, the prayer made by the petitioner, is allowed.

¶13

In view of above, learned District Judge, Malda is hereby directed to withdraw the Matrimonial Suit no. 466 of 2019 presently pending before the court of

¶14

¶15

learned Additional District Judge, 5^th Court, Malda and to transmit the same to the court of learned District Judge, Suri at Birbhum within a period of three weeks from the date of communication of the order and learned District Judge, Suri at Birbhum in turn will transfer the same to the court of learned Additional District Judge, Bolpur having jurisdiction to try the same within a period of three weeks thereafter.

¶16

The transferee court shall serve fresh notice upon both the parties intimating the next date of hearing before proceeding further with the aforesaid suit.

¶17

The department is directed to send a copy of the order to the learned District Judge, Suri, Birbhum Chinsurah and learned District Judge, Malda.

¶18

The transferee court is requested to make every endeavour for expeditious disposal of the suit and to conclude the entire proceeding of the suit preferably within a period of one year from the date of receipt of the case record.

¶19

Accordingly, C.O. 1188 of 2022 is disposed of and connected application, if any, also stands disposed of.

¶20

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, duly applied for, be given to the parties upon compliance of all requisite formalities.

¶21

(Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee, J.)

Shanti Harijan v. Bikram Hari

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shanti Harijan v. Bikram Hari

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Debabrati Maitra Vs Santanu Ghosh

Smt Sreejita Mitra Chakraborty Vs Smt Kaberia Chakraborty

Madhuri Ghosh Vs Mira Rani Ghosh & Ors.

Priyanka Shaw Vs Rajib Kr. Shaw

Rathindra Nath Mitra Vs Ratna Chattopadhaya

Bharati Mondal Vs Soumen Mondal