Dismissed

Mampi Das v. Debabrata Dutta

Gauhati HC25 Nov 2021Tr.P.(C)./57/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of a transfer petition under Section 24 CPC regarding a divorce suit. While refusing transfer due to an undertaking by the respondent to pay travel expenses, the court vacated a restricted interim order and directed the petitioner to file a written statement before the trial court.

What did the court decide?

Transfer petition dismissed with undertaking directed. Interim order vacated. Parties directed to proceed at Hojai Court.

Mampi Das Vs Debabrata Dutta — Domestic Violence | Gauhati HC (2021)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010222782018

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶4

Case No. : Tr.P.(C)./57/2018

¶5

MAMPI DAS

¶6

W/O. SRI DEBABRATA DUTTA, D/O. LT. BALU DAS, C/O. SRI BAISHISTA DAS, R/O. MOUMAKHIGAON, NEAR BOKAGHAT STADIUM, P.O. AND P.S. BHOKAGHAT, DIST. GOLAGHAT, ASSAM.

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

DEBABRATA DUTTA

¶9

S/O. LT. SATISH CHANDRA DUTTA, C/O. SRI NARAYAN BHOWMICK, R/O. TELIBASTI, NEAR DURGABARI, P.O. TELIBASTI, P.S. HOJAI, ASSAM782435.

¶10

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R DEV

¶11

Advocate for the Respondent : MS. RINA RONGMEI

¶12

BEFORE

¶13

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH

¶14

ORDER

¶15

Date : 25-11-2021

¶16

Heard Mr. R. Dev, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. Rina Rongmei, learned counsel for the respondent.

¶17

This application has been filed under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908

¶18

Page No.# 2/3

¶19

seeking transfer of Title Suit(D) No.43/2018 from the Court of the Additional District Judge, Hojai, Sankardev Nagar to the Court of District Judge, Golaghat.

¶20

The petitioner has alleged that she has received notice dated 05.09.2018 whereby she was asked to appear on 10/10/2018 before the Court of the Additional District Judge, Hojai, Sankardev Nagar in respect to proceedings initiated by the respondent seeking dissolution of the marriage. The case of the petitioner is that she is a lady and has no source of income and as such it would be difficult on her part to appear before the Court below at Hojai, Sankardev Nagar.

¶21

I have heard the learned counsels for both the parties. Taking into consideration that the petitioner has expressed difficulties in her participation in the proceeding at Hojai, Sankardev Nagar as she is a poor woman and she is presently staying with his elder brother, who has no source of income and the counsel for the respondent having agreed that the respondent shall pay Rs.3,000/- on every date of appearance before the Court at Hojai, Sankardev Nagar, I am of the opinion that as the petitioner’s grievance has been taken care of, the question of transfer of the proceeding from the Court of the Hojai, Sankardev Nagar to the Court of District Judge, Golaghat does not arise under the facts of the case. The other grounds raised in the petition in my opinion does not merit consideration as regards the transfer sought for.

¶22

With the above observation the instant petition stands disposed of. It is clarified that the payment of Rs. 3,000/- to be made by the respondent to the petitioner on every date of her appearance before the Court of District Judge, Golaghat would not in any manner be counted for the purposes of arriving at the maintenance to which the petitioner may seek as per provisions of law. The party shall appear before the Court of the Additional District Judge,

¶23

Page No.# 3/3

¶24

Hojai, Sankardev Nagar on 15.12.2021 and on which date the petitioner shall file her written

¶25

statement without fail.

¶26

The interim order dated 05.10.2018 stands vacated and the Court below shall proceed

¶27

with the disposal of the proceedings in accordance with law.

¶28

JUDGE

¶29

Comparing Assistant

Mampi Das v. Debabrata Dutta

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mampi Das v. Debabrata Dutta

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

Jamuna Barman Vs Amit Sahai, IFS

Jagat Konwar and 3 Ors. Vs Ragendra Nath Boro and Anr.

Isab Ali Vs Ful Khatun and 7 Ors.

M/S. Buildworth Pvt. Ltd. Vs Bharat Heavy Electrical Ltd.

Jahidul Islam and Anr. Vs on the Death of Abu Shama His Legal Heirs Jabeda Begum(Wife)and Ors.

M/S. Buildworth Pvt. Ltd. Vs Bharat Heavy Electrical Ltd.