Smt. Chandani Dhritlahare (Suman) Vs Yashpal Singh Suman

¶1

1

¶2

2026:CGHC:6481

¶3

NAFR

¶4

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

TPC No. 189 of 2025

¶6

Smt. Chandani Dhritlahare (Suman) D/o Shyam Ram Dhritlahare Aged About 32 Years R/o Village Khaira Post And Thana Kasdol, DistrictBalodabazar- Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh (Defendant)

¶7

... Petitioner

¶8

versus

¶9

Yashpal Singh Suman S/o Sahdev Prasad Suman Aged About 42 Years Medical Officer, Primary Health Centre Aundhi, District- Mohla- ManpurAmbagarh Chowki, Chhattisgarh (Plaintiff)

¶10

... Respondent

¶11

(Cause-tile taken from the Case Information System)

¶12

AMARDEEP CHOUBEY	Digitally signed by AMARDEEP CHOUBEY Date: 2026.02.06 10:35:30 +0530	For Petitioner	: Mr. Shubham Tiwari, Advocate on behalf of Ms. Nazmi Begam, Advocate.
		For Respondent	: Mr. Aditya Bhardwaj, Advocate.

¶13

Hon’ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Judgment on Board

¶14

05/02/2026

¶15

1. By this petition, the petitioner is seeking the transfer of HMA Suit No.10/2025, filed under Section 13(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 pending before the learned District Judge, FTC, Ambagarh Chowki, District Rajnandgaon, C.G. to the learned Family Court Balodabazar, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara, C.G.

¶16

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the marriage between the parties was solemnized on 13.06.2019 and out of their wedlock, they blessed with one baby boy, presently aged about 5

¶17

2

¶18

years. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is a lady aged about 32 years presently residing with her child at village Khaira District Balodabazar-Bhatapara and she faces difficulties to attend the proceedings before the Court of learned District Judge, FTC, Ambagarh, District Rajnandgaon, C.G. which is 259 km away from her present residing place, on the scheduled dates of hearing. Such travel imposes severe hardship upon the petitioner, therefore, the petition filed by the petitioner may be allowed.

¶19

3. Learned counsel for the respondent opposes the prayer made in the petition.

¶20

4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the pleadings and documents appended thereto.

¶21

5. In the matter of N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs. A.S. Saravana Karthik

¶22

(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:-

¶23

" 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 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

¶24

3

¶25

considering transfer.

¶26

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.”

¶27

6. 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.

¶28

7. Consequently, the Transfer Petition is allowed and it is ordered that HMA Suit No. 10 of 2025 which is pending before the Court of learned District Judge, FTC, Ambagarh, Chowki, District Rajnandgaon, C.G. be transferred to the learned Family Court Balodabazar, District:Balodabazar-Bhatapara, C.G. for its trial/disposal in accordance with law.

¶29

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

¶30

9. Both the parties are directed to remain present before the Court of learned Family Court Balodabazar, District:Balodabazar-Bhatapara, C.G. on 10.03.2026.

¶31

Amardeep

Smt. Chandani Dhritlahare (Suman) v. Yashpal Singh Suman

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Chandani Dhritlahare (Suman) v. Yashpal Singh Suman

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

Smt. Lakeshwari Sinha Vs Smt. Rambati Baghel

Amar Singh Vs Smt. Shivkantibai (Dead) through Legal Heirs

Smt. Tahira Begum Vs Akhtar Husain

Mahavir Prasad Kedia (Died) through His Legal Heirs Vs Motilal Sahu

Smt. Divya Jangde Vs Chatrasaal Kurre

The Oriental Insurance Company Limited Vs Pradeep Kumar Kosle