Smt. Tasneem Hasan Vs Md. Rehan @ Bhavesh Devdas

¶1

1

¶2

2025:CGHC:59383

¶3

AVINASH SHARMA

¶4

Digitally signed by AVINASH SHARMA Date: 2025.12.08 16:02:13 +0530

¶5

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶6

NAFR

¶7

TPC No. 138 of 2025

¶8

Smt. Tasneem Hasan W/o- Md. Rehan, Aged About 24 Years R/o- Bakhtawar Chal, Gali No. 8, Tulsipur, Ward No. - 18, Tahsil And District - Rajnandgaon (C.G.)

¶9

... Petitioner.

¶10

versus

¶11

Md. Rehan @ Bhavesh Devdas S/o Late Baldau Devdas, Aged About 28 Years R/o- Near Gajanand Temple, In Front Of Parshad Ajay Vaid’s house Mohalla - Vijay Nagar, P.S.- Mohan Nagar, Tahsil And District - Durg (C.G.)

¶12

... Respondent.

¶13

For Petitioner : Shri Jai Prakash Shukla, Advocate. For Respondent : Shri Shashikant Chouhan, Advocate.

¶14

Hon'ble Shri Justice Deepak Kumar Tiwari

¶15

Order On Board

¶16

08/12/2025

¶17

This Petition has been filed under Section 24 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 by the petitioner/wife seeking transfer of case No.CS625/2024 from Family Court, Durg C.G. to Family Court, Rajnandgaon C.G.

¶18

The marriage between the parties was solemnized on 05.01.2022. After some time, the dispute arose between the parties. The

¶19

2

¶20

respondent/husband, has filed an application against the petitioner under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act before the Principal Judge, Family Court Durg for restitution of conjugal rights.

¶21

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the wife is facing difficulties to travel for appearance before the Family Court, Durg, C.G. due to long distance that too with her child. He further submits that in MJC No.183/2024 filed by the petitioner under Section 144 BNSS, 2023 before Family Court Rajnandgaon seeking maintenance of Rs.10,000/-, respondent is already participating. Therefore, he prays to transfer the said case for the convenience of the wife to participate in the proceedings.

¶22

Learned counsel for the respondent would oppose the aforesaid prayer.

¶23

Heard learned counsel for the parties and also perused the documents annexed with the petition carefully.

¶24

In the matter of N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs. A.S. Saravana Karthik (2022 SCC Online SC 1199) the Hon’ble Supreme Court has observed that generally it is wife’s convenience which must be looked at while considering transfer. The relevant portion of the aforesaid judgment is reproduced hereunder:-

¶25

" 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 pattern, their standard of life prior to the marriage and subsequent thereto and the circumstances of both the parties in

¶26

3

¶27

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.

¶28

10 .Further, when two or more proceedings are pending in different Courts between the same parties which raise common question of fact and law, and when the decisions in the cases are interdependent, it is desirable that they should be tried together by the same Judge so as to avoid multiplicity in trial of the same issues and conflict of decisions.”

¶29

Having regard to the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and in view of the aforesaid principles, this Court is inclined to allow the prayer made by the petitioner.

¶30

Consequently, the Transfer Petition is allowed and it is ordered that case No.CS-625/2024 be transferred from Family Court, Durg C.G. to Family Court, Rajnandgaon C.G. for its trial/disposal in accordance with law.

¶31

Both the parties are directed to remain present before the Family Court, Rajnandgaon C.G. on 15.01.2026.

¶32

10.The respondent/husband would be at liberty to participate in the proceedings through video conferencing/virtually unless otherwise directed by the concerned Court.

¶33

11.Pending application, if any, also stand disposed of.

¶34

(Deepak Kumar Tiwari) Judge

¶35

Avinash

Smt. Tasneem Hasan v. Md. Rehan @ Bhavesh Devdas

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Tasneem Hasan v. Md. Rehan @ Bhavesh Devdas

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

Mary Jacinta Toppo Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Chamram Sinha Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Surja Devi Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Omkar Prasad Verma Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Virendra Kumar Vs Sangeeta And Anr.

Sita Devi Patel Vs State of Chhattisgarh