Allowed

Rajeshwari Bai v. Dani Prakash Mishra

Chhattisgarh HC15 Mar 2007TPC/5/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed a transfer petition seeking to move a divorce case from District Judge Kawardha to District Judge Rajnandgaon. The decision was based on the wife’s residence in Rajnandgaon, her father’s heart ailment, and apprehension of harassment at the original forum.

What did the court decide?

Case No. 12-A/2006 pending before District Judge Kawardha is transferred to the Court of District Judge Rajnandgaon. Parties directed to appear on 25-04-2007.

Rajeshwari Bai Vs Dani Prakash Mishra — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Chhattisgarh HC (2007)

¶1

HEGH CUROT OF C H ATTI$GARH AT BILASPUR

¶2

Transfef Petition No. 05112007

¶3

\ 4x

¶4

S in le Bench: H on’ble Shri D ili Raosaheb Deshmukh J. Appiicant Rajeshwari Ba i, lo Dani Prakash Méshra, Aged about 22 years, R/o Sahaspur ‘ Lohara, Presently‘R/o. Salik Ghiriya, Poiice Station: Dcngargaon Past: Arjuni, Tahsil : Rajnandgaon, DiSit. Rajnandgaon (CG) VERSUS Non-appiicant Dani Prakash Mi$hra, Slo Govind Prasad M isha’a, Aged Eboai 2§ years, Rib Sahaspur Loharé, Gccupatioa' Business; Peiice Station : Lichara, Tahsik Kawardha, Distt. Kabirdham {0(3)

¶5

Appiicant

¶6

Non-appiicant

¶7

Pfesent: Shri Anup Mazaumdar counsei for the petitioher Shrl H B Agarwal Senior Advoca;e With Ms Sangeeta Mishi'a counsei for the respondent

¶8

ORAL ORDER

¶9

(Passed^on15mMarch 2607) The feiiowing oral order of the Court was passed by

¶10

Dilip Racsaheb Deshmukh, Jl

¶11

At the request 0i” learned counsel for the panties,^this petition is ’ being finally dispased of at the stage of admission. ’l. Heard finally 2. Brief facts are that the nen-apphcani heiem fled a petition under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act bearing case No 12-N2006 before the D istrict Judge, Kawardha. The applicant—Wife seeks tiansier of the above case to District Rajnandgaon on‘the ground that father of the applicant is a heart patient and suffering from various ailments“ Besides, the applicant is also reeiding at her maternal home in District-Rajnahdgaon and the Court at Rajnandgaon also has jurisdiction to hear the divorce oetition The applicant would face undue haldship In traveilmg from Rajrandgaon to Kawardha for attending hearings of the matter ltovyas also urged that the applicant apprehends danger to her life and also harassment at the hands of the nonmapplicant i 3. v On the other hand Shn H B Agrawai learned Senior Aavocate has senousiy opposed the application and contended that while awarding interim maintenance the learned lower Court has taken Into

¶12

V 'i a

¶13

consideration the amount of expenses to be incurred by the app1icant herein for undertaking journey from Rajnand aon to Kawardha. it was also urged that brother of the applicant had criminal antecedents and was likely to harass the non-applicant, if the atter was transferred to Rajnandgaon. Learned Sr. counsel for the no} applicant submitted that Itransferred he would have no objection if the matter is to the District l Judge Bilaspur and also submitted that the non aoplicant is ready and Willing to pay the to and fro travelling expenses of the appiioant on each hearing r

¶14

Having heard rival contentions, gthe aoplication deserves to be allowed. ln View of the dictum of the ApexlCourt in Neelam Pravin ' Sinqh Bhadoria v Pravin Sinqh Ramakant’Bhadoria 2096 (2) ANJ ,(SC) (Moo)¹³⁷ 2006 (a) Supreme 757 and Sumrta smqh v Kuma: Sangay and another 2002-AIR-{SC)-O-396 ! 2001^-SCC-10-41 it is now well/settled that in such matters the convenience of Wife has to be seen. lri this case, the appiicant is residing in District-Rajnandgaon. The proceedings^{initiatedbythenon-applioantareatDistrict-Kawardhawhich} is situated 140 Kilometers from her maternal home. The documents enciosed by the applicant shows that her father is suffering from serious heart aiiments. There is no direct connection or transport either by Railway or road from her place of residence i.e. Village-Sahaspur Lohara' ’unable to Kawardha. Father of the applicant is to acoompany her to Kawardha on each date of hearing due to various ailments The a pplicant—wife also apprehends harassment at the hands of the nonapplicant at Kawardha. In this View of the; matter, it is just and expedient that the case No.12—Al2006 is transferred to the District Judge, Rajnandgaon.

¶15

Consequently, the application (Transfer Petition (Civii) No.05/2007) is allowed. The case No ,12-Af2006 pending before the District Judge Kawardha is transferred to the Court of District Judge Rainandoaon Parties are directed to appear before the District iudge Rainandgaon on 25-04—2007.

¶16

er Sd—/ Dlllp^{RaosahebDeshmukh} Judge

¶17

Certified copy as per rules.

¶18

/.,..M__. .N .

Rajeshwari Bai v. Dani Prakash Mishra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajeshwari Bai v. Dani Prakash Mishra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt Rashmit Kaur Vs Ashok Jeewan Lal Bansod and Others

P.Vijaya and Another Vs Mangal Jeet Singh and Others

Yuvraj Singh Vs Ganpat Ram Sahu and Another

Kodiya Bai Vs Rajkumar and Others

New India Assurance Ltd. Vs Banshilal and Others

Nakul Vishwas and Others Vs Smt.Golapi Vishwas and Others