Allowed

Smt.Shambha.R v. Sri Mahendra

Karnataka HC11 Apr 2014CP/151/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the transfer of matrimonial case No.164/2013 from the Family Court, Chikmagalur, to the Family Court, Bangalore. The Court held that given the distance and the petitioner's gender, transferring the case would facilitate her defense. It found the hardship to the respondent to be minimal, especially as he was a businessman and already resided near Chikmagalur.

What did the court decide?

Matrimonial case No.164/2013 transferred to Family Court at Bangalore; Court directed to expedite disposal; Liberty reserved for petitioner regarding exemption from personal appearance.

Smt.Shambha.R Vs Sri Mahendra — Execution and Attachment | Karnataka HC (2014)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

¶3

DATED THIS THE 11^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2014

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.S.PATIL

¶6

C.P.No. 151/2013

¶7

BETWEEN

¶8

Smt Shambha R W/o. Sri Mahendra, Aged about 34 years, C/o. Asha Shetty, No.326, Akshaya Nilaya, Kuvempu Nagar, I Cross, Dooravaninagara Post, Vijinapura, Bangalore 560 016.

¶9

... PETITIONER

¶10

(By Sri Raghavendra Prasad, Adv.)

¶11

AND

¶12

Sri Mahendra S/o. Kariyanna Shetty, Aged about 34 years, R/at Kalidasa Road, Abbigadde, Upparpet, Koppa 577 126. Chikmagalur District.` ... RESPONDENT

¶13

(By Sri Prasanna Shetty, Adv.)

¶14

¶15

This CP is filed under Section 24 CPC praying to transfer M.C.No.164/2013 pending on the file of the Principal Judge, Family Court, Chikmagalur to the Family Court at Bangalore.

¶16

This CP coming on for admission, this day, the Court made the following:

¶17

¶18

ORDER

¶19

This is wife’s petition filed under Section 24 CPC seeking transfer of matrimonial case No.164/2013 from the Family Court, Chikmaglur to the Family Court at Bangalore.

¶20

Marriage of the petitioner and the respondent took place on 17.05.2010 at Koppa in Chikmagalur District. Petitioner and the respondent resided together for sometime at Koppa. Differences having arisen, petitioner is now staying at Bangalore. Respondent – husband has filed a matrimonial case seeking dissolution of marriage on the ground of cruelty and desertion.

¶21

Case of the petitioner is that as she is residing at Bangalore, being a lady, she is unable to undertake journey to Chikmagalur which is situated at a distance of about 250 Kms. from Bangalore.

¶22

It is urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner that it would be also difficult for the petitioner to meet the expenses required to travel to Chikmagalur and incur other incidental expenses to stay at Chikmagalur to defend herself in the case and hence, if the matrimonial case is withdrawn from

¶23

¶24

Chikmagalur and transferred to Bangalore, it would serve the ends of justice and help the petitioner to effectively defend herself.

¶25

Learned counsel appearing for the respondent submits that if the case is transferred, respondent would be put to hardship.

¶26

Having heard the learned counsel for both parties, I find that as the petitioner is a lady and keeping in mind the distance between Banglaore and Chikmagalur, it would be difficult for her to travel to Chikmagalur each time the case is listed there to defend herself in the matrimonial case. However, respondent being a businessman can afford to come over to Bangalore to prosecute the petition, if it is withdrawn and transferred here.

¶27

As pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner, respondent has to anyway travel to Chikmagalur from Koppa covering a distance of about 100 Kms. to prosecute his case. Therefore, it would not result in such a serious hardship or prejudice to him, because, in any event, he has to travel atleast 100 Kms. to reach Chikmagalur. Hence, comparatively, there will be lesser hardship for the respondent.

¶28

¶29

To mitigate the hardship that may be caused to the respondent, the Family Court at Bangalore can be directed to expedite the disposal of the case and exempt his personal appearance as and when found necessary.

¶30

Hence, this petition is allowed. M.C.No.164/2013 is withdrawn from the Family Court, Chikmagalur and transferred to the Family Court at Bangalore for disposal in accordance with law. The Family Court at Bangalore is directed to expedite the disposal of the case. Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to seek exemption from personal appearance whenever found

¶31

necessary.

¶32

Sd/JUDGE

¶33

Smt.Shambha.R v. Sri Mahendra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt.Shambha.R v. Sri Mahendra

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

Sri. M.B. Ningappa Vs the President

Smt. Shenaza Sultana Vs the Karnataka State Transport Authority

Global Energy Private Limited Vs Power Company of Karnataka Limited

Anil Bhandari Vs State of Karnataka

Smt Gowramma Vs the Managing Director

Ramanna S Talewad Vs the Govt of Karnataka