The High Court dismissed a Transfer Petition filed under Section 24 of the CPC. The petitioner sought to transfer a Family Court suit from Dhanbad to Jamshedpur alleging safety concerns, but the Court found insufficient ground to allow the transfer.
Transfer Petition dismissed; petitioner advised to seek police protection in Dhanbad.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Transfer Petition (C) No. 41 of 2014
Kunal Kumar Gupta
… Petitioner
-V e r s u s -
Rupa Singh
... Opposite Party
CORAM: - HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE D. N. UPADHYAY
For the Appellants : Mr. Rohit Sinha, Advocate. For the Respondent: Mr. Prabir Kumar Chaterjee, Advocate.
03/08.09.2015 This petition has been filed under Section 24 of the Civil Procedure Code with a prayer to transfer T.M.S. No. 428/ 2013 from the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Dhanbad to the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Jamshedpur.
It is submitted that petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act was filed before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Jamshedpur and in that case an ex-parte decree has been granted in favour of the petitioner. The opposite party has filed criminal case and the Divorce Suit at Dhanbad under the influence of her parents.
It is submitted that it was love marriage between petitioner and the opposite party but the parent of opposite party did not recognise it and after having control over opposite party, these cases have been filed. The petitioner apprehends danger of his life if he goes to attend case at Dhanbad. In this connection he has written letter to the Superintendent of Police also.
Counsel for the opposite part has opposed the prayer and submitted that she was kidnapped and for that criminal case has been lodged. Somehow she got herself released from clutches of the petitioner and now she has been living with her parents. She does not want to live with the petitioner and, therefore, she has filed Title Matrimonial Suit No. 428 of 2013 for dissolution of the marriage. It is not possible for the opposite party to attend the Court of choice of the petitioner.
Considering facts and circumstances and submissions advanced on behalf of the opposite party, I do not feel inclined to allow this petition. Accordingly, this Transfer Petition stands dismissed with an observation as and when protection shall be sought for by the petitioner, that may be provided to him by Superintendent of Police, Dhanbad.
This petition is accordingly rejected.
(D. N. Upadhyay, J.)
RC/
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a transfer prayer is maintainable when the Supreme Court expressly stated that such applications were not proper and that the judgment below did not provide reasons for not transferring the ca
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Kunal Kumar Gupta
Rupa Singh
D. N. Upadhyay
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
