Allowed

Smt. Prema W/O Krishna Kattimani v. Krishna S/O Laxmana Kattimani

Karnataka HC19 Oct 2022CP/100049/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka allowed a transfer petition filed by a wife seeking to move a restitution of conjugal rights case from Family Court, Bagalkote, to Family Court, Gadag, citing difficulty in travel and expense. The court exercised its discretion under Section 24 CPC to balance convenience, noting the wife's residence in a remote village and the presence of a minor child.

What did the court decide?

Transfer of M.C.No.122/2021 from Family Court, Bagalkote to Family Court, Gadag.

Smt. Prema W/O Krishna Kattimani Vs… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH

¶3

DATED THIS THE 19^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2022

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI

¶6

CIVIL PETITION NO.100049 OF 2022 (FC)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SMT. PREMA W/O KRISHNA KATTIMANI AGE: 26 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEWIFE, R/O C/O: NAGESH NAIK, KALASAPUR THANDA NEAR SEVALAL TEMPLE, GADAG-582101.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. SRINIVAS B. NAIK, ADVOCATE.)

¶11

AND:

¶12

KRISHNA S/O LAXMANA KATTIMANI AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE, R/O: NEELANAGAR, BAGALKOTE-587101.

¶13

…RESPONDENT

¶14

(RESPONDENT IS SERVED.)

¶15

THIS CIVIL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 24 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908, PRAYING TO PASS AN ORDER OF WITHDRAWAL OF M.C.NO.122/2021, PENDING ON THE FILE OF PRINCIPAL JUDGE FAMILY COURT, BAGALAKOTE, AND TRANSFER IT TO THE COURT OF PRINCIAPL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, AT GADAG, ETC.,.

¶16

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

¶18

ORDER

¶19

Sri Srinivas B. Naik, learned counsel for petitioner has appeared in person.

¶20

The petition is listed for admission after notice to respondents. Though notice is served, respondent is unrepresented.

¶21

The facts are quite simple and are stated as under:

¶22

It is stated that the Petitioner and respondent are husband and wife and their marriage was performed on 06.12.2015 at Neelanagar village in Bagalkote taluk. From the wedlock, they have a female child by name – Ritika. They lived blissfully for some time. Due to difference of opinion and misunderstanding, the respondent was constrained to file a petition for restitution of conjugal rights before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Bagalkote, in M.C.No.122/2021.

¶23

Aggrieved by the institution of the petition, the petitioner wife has filed this petition under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking transfer of case in M.C.No.122/2021 from the Court of Principal Judge, Family

¶24

¶25

Court at Bagalkote, to the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court at Gadag.

¶26

Sri Srinivas B. Naik, learned counsel for petitioner submits that the petitioner is residing at Kalasapur Tanda, which is a remote village in Gadag Taluk, Gadag District and her husband has filed the petition for divorce before the Family Court at Bagalkote.

¶27

Next, he submitted that the petitioner is not able to go to Bagalkote to attend the case which is quite a distance from her place of residence.

¶28

A further submission is made that it would be very difficult and inconvenient for the petitioner to go to Bagalkote as and when the case is posted as the respondent is not able to meet the travelling expenses.

¶29

It is also submitted that with a great difficulty she is maintaining herself and the minor daughter.

¶30

Learned counsel vehemently contended that petitioner is a helpless lady and she is not in a position to travel to Bagalkote and contest the case.

¶31

¶32

Lastly, he submitted that the grounds urged for transfer may be taken into consideration and the case may be transferred from the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Bagalkote, to the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Gadag.

¶33

Heard the contentions urged on behalf of petitioner and perused the petition paper with care.

¶34

The short question which would arise for consideration is whether the case in M.C.No.122/2021 pending on the file of Principal Judge, Family Court, Bagalkote be transferred to the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Gadag?

¶35

It is not in dispute that petitioner and respondent are husband and wife. Their marriage was performed on 06.12.2015. They lived blissfully for some time. They are blessed with a female child. Due to difference of opinion and misunderstanding, petitioner was constrained to live apart from her husband - respondent.

¶36

Due to conflicts and misunderstandings, parties have chosen to litigate the issues before the Court of Law. The

¶37

¶38

respondent has filed a petition in M.C.No.122/2021 wherein he has sought the aid of the Court seeking restitution of conjugal rights. He has chosen the Forum of Family Court at Bagalkote. But, the wife - petitioner has sought for transfer of the case.

¶39

The question being whether there is some other Forum which is appropriate for the trial of the action, according to petitioner, the Court at Gadag is the appropriate Forum to litigate the dispute. The grounds taken by wife in the transfer petition are;

¶40

Travel is unsafe being a lady,

¶41

Expenses required for travel,

¶42

Inconvenience to travel along with a minor child,

¶43

Hence, this petition under Section 24 of CPC.

¶44

In this regard, it would be relevant to refer to Section 24

¶45

of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

¶46

“24 GENERAL POWER OF TRANSFER AND WITHDRAWAL (1) On the application of any of the parties and after notice to the parties and after hearing such of them as desired to be heard, or of its own motion without such notice, the High Court or the District Court may at any stage,-

¶47

¶48

(a) transfer any suit, appeal or other proceeding pending before it for trial or disposal to any Court subordinate to it and competent to try or dispose of the same; or

¶49

(b) withdraw any suit, appeal or other proceeding pending in any Court subordinate to it; and

¶50

(i) try or dispose of the same; or

¶51

(ii) transfer the same for trial or disposal to any Court subordinate to it and competent to try or dispose of the same; or

¶52

(iii) retransfer the same for trial or disposal to the Court from which it was withdrawn."

¶53

The Section confers a general power to transfer, withdraw and transfer suits, appeals or other proceedings at any stage on the application of party. The purpose of Section 24 of CPC is merely to confer discretionary power. A Court acting under Section 24 of CPC may or may not in its judicial discretion transfer a particular case.

¶54

It would be relevant to note that the basic principle governing the granting of a petition under Section 24 of CPC is that the petition is not to be dealt with in a light hearted manner and transfer of a case from one Court to another should not be granted readily for any fancied notion of the

¶55

¶56

petitioning litigant because of the reason that such transfer of a case from one Judge to another in effect casts a doubt on the integrity, competence, and reputation of the concerned Judge. Unless and until a sufficiently cogent ground is disclosed, transfer should not be allowed as a matter of course.

¶57

For the purpose of such transfer, balance of convenience of the parties should be considered. It is well established that whenever Courts are called upon to consider the plea of transfer in matrimonial matters, the convenience of the wife is relevant consideration.

¶58

In the present case, it is not in dispute that the petitioner is residing at a remote village called Kalasapur Tanda. It is relevant to note that the petitioner has also pleaded that petitioner is not able to meet the expenses of traveling to attend the case at Bagalkote.

¶59

As already noted above, whenever Courts are called upon to consider the plea of transfer in matrimonial matter, the Court must look into the convenience of the wife. She has specifically pleaded that it would be convenient for her to

¶60

¶61

attend the case at Gadag. Therefore, it is not appropriate for this Court to direct her to attend the proceedings at Bagalkote Court.

¶62

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that it is just and proper to transfer the M.C.No.122/2021 pending on the file of Principal Judge, Family Court, Bagalkote to the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court Gagag.

¶63

In the result, the Civil Petition succeeds and it is accordingly allowed .

¶64

This Court directs to transfer M.C.No.122/2021 on the file of Principal Judge, Family Court, Bagalkote to the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Gadag.

¶65

Sd/JUDGE

¶66

MRK

Smt. Prema W/O Krishna Kattimani v. Krishna S/O Laxmana Kattimani

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Prema W/O Krishna Kattimani v. Krishna S/O Laxmana Kattimani

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

Shri.Sanjay S/O Ramchandra Patil, Vs Shri.Balasaheb S/O. Govindrao Manavi

Hanamappa S/O Laxmappa Gadigennavar Vs the Special Land Acquisition Officer

Bandeppanavar S/O Siddappa Shanthaveerappa Vs Bade Sab S/O Mahalinga Sab

Smt. Sujata W/O. Mallanagouda Patil Vs Shri. Mallanagouda S/O. Shivanagouda Patil

Mallikarjun Basavanappa Wali Vs Basavaraj Gopal Naicker

Smt. Priyanka W/O. Abindandan Basti Vs Shri. Abinandan S/O. Anantraj Basti