Dhaatri Sahu Vs Mahendra Kumar Sahu

¶1

1

¶2

2025:CGHC:43343

¶3

NAFR

¶4

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

TPC No. 108 of 2025

¶6

1 - Dhaatri Sahu W/o Mahendra Kumar Sahu, Aged About 27 Years R/o Home Of Virendra Singh, Galli No. 16B, Shanti Nagar, Bhilai Tehsil Bhilai, District Durg, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner

¶7

versus

¶8

1 - Mahendra Kumar Sahu S/o Ishwar Prasad Sahu, Aged About 30 Years R/o Pawni, Ayush Traders, Tehsil Bhilaigarh, Distt. Sarangarh, Chhattisgarh.

¶9

... Respondent

¶10

(Cause title, as taken from Case Information System)

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr. B.P. Singh, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr. Siddharth Pandey, Advocate.

¶12

(Hon’ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi)

¶13

Order On Board

¶14

26/08/2025

¶15

Heard.

¶16

The petitioner/wife has filed an instant petition under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short ‘CPC’), 1908 for transfer of Civil Suit No.A/12/2025 (Mahendra Kumar Sahu versus Dhaatri Sahu) pending before the learned District and Additional Sessions Judge, Sarangarh, District Sarangarh-Bhilaigarh to the learned Family Court, Durg, District

¶17

2

¶18

Durg (CG).

¶19

Learned counsel for the petitioner/wife would submit that marriage of petitioner/wife was solemnized with the respondent/husband on 22.04.2023 as per the Hindu custom and rituals. They have blessed with a female child; namely Ku. Bhumiksha Sahu on 11.01.2024. But because of cruelty meted out to the petitioner/wife by respondent/husband coupled with demand of dowry, she was compelled to live apart, therefore, she is presently residing along with her daughter at Durg. He would further submit that respondent/husband has filed divorce petition bearing Civil Suit No.A/12/2025 under Section 13 (1)(क) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 before the District and Additional Sessions Judge, Sarangarh, District Sarangarh-Bhilaigarh, whereas petitioner/wife has filed application under Section 144 of the B.N.S.S., 2023 for seeking maintenance before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Durg and another case bearing Case No.266/2025 under Section 12, 18, 19, 20, 22, 23 (1) & (2) of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, is also pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Durg (CG) against the respondent/husband. It is further submitted that, to and fro distance between Durg and Sarangarh is about 500 km and being a lady and mother of a female minor child, it would be difficult for her to travel such long distance, whereas if divorce petition is transferred from Sarangarh to Durg, then it would be convenient for respondent /husband also as he has already come to Durg to attend hearing in aforesaid two cases, therefore, it is prayed that Civil Suit No.A/12/2025 (divorce petition) filed by respondent/husband be transferred from the District and Additional Sessions Judge, Sarangarh,

¶20

3

¶21

District Sarangarh-Bhilaigarh to the Family Court, Durg, District Durg (CG).

¶22

Per Contra, learned counsel for the respondent/husband opposed the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶23

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record carefully.

¶24

Admittedly, the divorce petition filed by the respondent/husband is pending before the District and Additional Sessions Judge, Sarangarh, District Sarangarh-Bhilaigarh. Further, to and fro distance between Durg and Sarangarh is about 500 km. The petitioner/wife is mother of a minor female child and two cases are already pending against the respondent/husband before the Family Court, Durg, therefore, if divorce petition is transferred from District and Additional Sessions Judge, Sarangarh, District Sarangarh-Bhilaigarh to Family Court, Durg, District Durg, then it would not cause any difficulty to the respondent, even otherwise respondent has to come to attend hearing at Durg in aforesaid two cases, as such, it would be convenient for both the parties.

¶25

Hon'ble Apex Court in N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs. A.S. Saravana Karthik reported in 2022 SCC Online SC 1199 held at para 9 which reads as under:-

¶26

" 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 the 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

¶27

4

¶28

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 socioeconomic paradigm in the Indian society, generally, it is the wife's convenience which must be looked at while considering transfer.”

¶29

Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Sumita Singh Versus Kumar Sanjay and another reported in 2001 10 SCC 41 has observed that if husband files suit against wife, then convenience of wife must be looked into. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Rajani Kishor Pardeshi Versus Kishore Babulal Pardeshi reported in (2005) 12 SCC 237 has observed that the convenience of wife is to be preferred over the convenience of the husband.

¶30

Considering the aforesaid facts of the case, as discussed in preceding paragraphs and further considering the aforecited case laws, wherein it has been observed that, in transfer of matrimonial cases, the wife's convenience must be looked into, in the considered opinion of this Court, it is a fit case for transfer of the civil suit, as prayed for.

¶31

Consequently, the instant transfer petition is allowed . It is ordered that the Civil Suit No.A/12/2025 (Mahendra Kumar Sahu versus Dhaatri Sahu) pending before the District and Additional Sessions Judge, Sarangarh, District Sarangarh-Bhilaigarh be transferred to the Family Court, Durg, District Durg (CG) for its trial/disposal in accordance with law.

¶32

The District and Additional Sessions Judge, Sarangarh, District Sarangarh-Bhilaigarh is directed to transmit the record of the aforesaid Civil Suit No. A/12/2025 to the Family Court, Durg, District Durg (CG),

¶33

5

¶34

within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt/submission of a copy of this order. It is further observed that after receiving the case on transfer, the transferred Court is directed to consider and decide the case as early as possible, preferably within a further period of four months from the date of receipt of the record from the transferring Court.

¶35

Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of. No order as to cost(s).

¶36

SD/-

¶37

(Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge

¶38

Rukhsar

¶39

RUKHSAR BANO Digitally signed by RUKHSAR BANO Date: 2025.08.30 11:12:34 +0530

Dhaatri Sahu v. Mahendra Kumar Sahu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dhaatri Sahu v. Mahendra Kumar Sahu

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

Similar cases

Dwarika Vs Sushil Bai @ Sushila

Dinesh Agrawal Vs Reeta Ghosal

Dr. Manik Chatterjee, Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Aniruddh Bagh Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Suman Bahadur Vs Assistant Engineer

Laxman Mandavi Vs Branch Manager