Allowed

Ms. Bhagyalakshmi Alias Bhagyasahree v. Mr. I Raghavendra

Karnataka HC4 Nov 2022CP/100052/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka allowed a civil petition seeking transfer of a divorce petition from Hosapete to Saundatti. The court held that the wife's residence, inability to afford travel expenses, and safety concerns constituted sufficient grounds to transfer the case, citing the convenience of the wife as a relevant factor.

What did the court decide?

M.C.No.97/2021 is transferred from the Court of Addl. Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Hosapete, to the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Saundatti.

Ms. Bhagyalakshmi Alias Bhagyasahree Vs Mr. I… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH

¶3

DATED THIS THE 04^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2022

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI

¶6

CIVIL PETITION NO.100052 OF 2022

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

MS.BHAGYALAKSHMI @ BHAGYASAHREE W/O. MR.I.RAGHAVENDRA AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEWIFE, R/O. C/O. MR.GURURAJ HONALLI G.T.HONALLI SAREE CENTRE, BAZAAR ROAD, MUNAVALLI-591 117 TQ: SAUNDATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI P.V.GUNJAL, ADVOCATE.)

¶11

AND:

¶12

MR.I.RAGHAVENDRA S/O.MR.SHANKAR AGE: 33 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESSMAN, R/O. RAJIV NAGAR, HOSAPETE-583201, DIST: VIJAYANAGAR.

¶13

…RESPONDENT (BY SMT.KAVITA JADHAV, FOR SHRI ARUN L. NEELOPANT,

¶14

ADVOCATE.)

¶15

THIS CIVIL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 24 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908, SEEKING TO WITHDRAW AND TRANSFER M.C.NO.97/2021, FROM THE COURT OF ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HOSAPETE, TO THE COURT OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, SAUNDATTI, ETC.,.

¶16

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

¶17

¶18

ORDER

¶19

Sri P.V.Gunjal, learned counsel for petitioner and

¶20

Smt.Kavita Jadhav, learned counsel on behalf of Sri Arun L. Neelopant, for respondent, have appeared in person.

¶21

The petition is listed for admission after notice to respondent.

¶22

The facts are quite simple and are stated as

¶23

under:

¶24

It is stated that the Petitioner and respondent are husband and wife and their marriage was solemnized on 09.03.2015 at Munavalli. They lived blissfully for some time. Due to difference of opinion and misunderstanding, the respondent was constrained to file a divorce petition seeking divorce before the Addl. Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Hosapete, in M.C.No.97/2021.

¶25

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.97/2021 from the Court of Addl. Senior Civil Judge

¶26

¶27

and JMFC, Hosapete, to the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Saundatti.

¶28

Sri P.V.Gunjal, learned counsel for petitioner submits that the petitioner is residing at Munavalli Village, which is a remote village in Saundatti Taluk, and her husband has filed the petition for divorce before the Addl. Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, at Hosapete.

¶29

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

¶30

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

¶31

It is also submitted that with a great difficulty she is maintaining herself.

¶32

¶33

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

¶34

Lastly, he submitted that the grounds urged for transfer may be taken into consideration and the case may be transferred from the Court of Addl. Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Hosapete, to the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Saundatti.

¶35

Smt.Kavita Jadhav, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent has vehemently contended that the husband has initiated divorce proceedings in the year 2021 and subsequent to the filing of the divorce petition, the wife has filed a petition seeking restitution of conjugal rights under section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, at Saundatti, in the year 2022, for the sake of showing that the case is pending at Saundatti Court and she is not able to attend the Court at Hospete.

¶36

Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner has not made out any grounds to transfer the petition. The

¶37

¶38

counsel has urged several contentions and accordingly prays for dismissal of the petition.

¶39

Heard the contentions urged on behalf of respective parties and perused the petition papers with care.

¶40

The short question which would arise for consideration is whether the case in M.C.No.97/2021, pending on the file of Addl. Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Hosapete, be transferred to the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Saundatti?

¶41

It is not in dispute that petitioner and respondent are husband and wife. Their marriage was solemnized on 09.03.2015. They lived blissfully for some time. Due to difference of opinion and misunderstanding, petitioner was constrained to live apart from her husband - respondent.

¶42

Due to conflicts and misunderstandings, parties have chosen to litigate the issues before the Court of Law. The respondent has filed a petition in M.C.No.97/2021 wherein he has sought the aid of the Court seeking divorce. He has

¶43

¶44

chosen the Forum of Addl. Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, at Hosapete. But, the wife - petitioner has sought for transfer of the case.

¶45

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

¶46

Travel is unsafe being a lady,

¶47

Expenses required for travel,

¶48

Inconvenience to travel,

¶49

Hence, this petition under Section 24 of CPC.

¶50

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

¶51

24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

¶52

"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,-

¶53

¶54

(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

¶55

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

¶56

(i) try or dispose of the same; or

¶57

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

¶58

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

¶59

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.

¶60

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

¶61

¶62

hearted manner and transfer of a case from one Court to another should not be granted readily for any fancied notion of the 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.

¶63

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.

¶64

In the present case, it is not in dispute that the petitioner is residing at a remote village called Munavalli. 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 Hosapete.

¶65

¶66

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

¶67

The law is also well settled by the Hon’ble Apex Court in this regard in N.C.V.Aishwarya vs. A.S.Saravana

¶68

Karthik Sha, reported in AIR 2022 SC 4318 .

¶69

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.97/2021 pending on the file of Addl. Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Hosapete, to the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Saundatti,.

¶70

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

¶71

¶72

This Court directs to transfer M.C.No.97/2021 from the Court of Addl. Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Hosapete, to the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Saundatti.

¶73

If video conferencing provision is available, the respondent is at liberty to appear through video

¶74

conferencing.

¶75

Sd/JUDGE

¶76

MRK

Ms. Bhagyalakshmi Alias Bhagyasahree v. Mr. I Raghavendra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ms. Bhagyalakshmi Alias Bhagyasahree v. Mr. I Raghavendra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mamtaj Begum Vs Smt Babunabi

Smt Durgamma Vs Sri Shaniyar

Manohar S/O Ramakrishna Bongale Vs Bhimappa S/O Basalingappa Kadli

Shri Babu Appasab Ammanagi Vs Shri Gulabsab S/O Imamsab Multani

Smt.Megha W/O Abhishek Kulkarni Vs Abhishek Kulkarni S/O Ashok Kulkarni

Sri.Sunil Kumar S/O Iranna Teli Vs Smt.Pooja W/O Sunil Kumar Teli