Allowed

Soumya B H v. T C Nagaraja

Karnataka HC7 Feb 2023CP/244/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka allowed a petition for the transfer of matrimonial proceedings from the Family Court at Bengaluru to the Family Court at Davanagere. The court consolidated the matter with other pending suits filed by the petitioner at Davanagere to avoid travel inconvenience.

What did the court decide?

Transferred proceedings in MC No.126/2022 from Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru to Senior Civil Judge, Davanagere to be tried along with MC No.84/2022.

Soumya B H Vs T C Nagaraja — Matrimonial and Divorce | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

CP No. 244 of 2022

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2023 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR CIVIL PETITION NO. 244 OF 2022

¶4

BETWEEN:

¶5

SOUMYA B.H. W/O T.C. NAGARAJA, D/O HANUMANTHAPPA B, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, R/AT C/O GIRISH MASTER HOUSE, 2^ND CROSS, NEAR YANTHRAPURA POST OFFICE, LABOURS COLONY, HARIHARA, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT - 577601.

¶6

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. SRINIVASA GOUDA K., ADVOCATE) AND:

¶7

Digitally signed by B LAVANYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶8

T.C. NAGARAJA S/O T. CHANDRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, R/AT NO.148, 2^ND MAIN, 2^ND CROSS, SADANANDA NAGARA, NGEF LAYOUT, BENGALURU - 560039. 2. SREENATHA, S/O MUNI REDDY, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/AT NO.C518, BRIGADE GOLDEN TRIANGLE, SY.NO.49, 50, 51, HUSKUR VILLAGE, BIDARAHALLI HOBLI, KATTAMNALLUR, SANNATAMMANAHALLI, BANGALORE - 560049.

¶9

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. KARTHIK A BHARGAV, ADVOCATE FOR R1; MR. CHITANYA V. JOSHI, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CIVIL PETITION IS FILED U/S 24 OF CPC, PRAYING TO PASS AN ORDER WITHDRAWING MC NO. 126/2022 FROM THE COURT OF LEARNED V ADDL PRL. JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, NYAYADEGULA, BENGALURU AND TRASNFER THE SAME TO THE COURT OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, HARIHARA, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT.

¶10

¶11

CP No. 244 of 2022

¶12

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

¶13

ORDER

¶14

Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned counsel for respondent.

¶15

This petition is preferred by the wife seeking transfer of matrimonial proceedings in MC.No.126/2022 pending on the file of the V Addl. Principal Judge, Family Court at Bengaluru to the Senior Civil Judge, Harihara, Davanagere District.

¶16

It is the contention of the learned counsel for petitioner that their marriage was solemnized on 14.12.2013 at Harihara and pursuant to which a son born by name Yuvaan, aged 5 years. He further contends that the respondent No.1 has ill-treated and harassed her and she was driven out of the matrimonial home. Hence, she is now residing with her parents at Harihar.

¶17

Learned counsel for petitioner further contends that there is life threat and hence it is not possible to travel to Family Court at Bengaluru to attend the proceedings in MC

¶18

¶19

CP No. 244 of 2022

¶20

No.126/2022 initiated by the respondent under the provisions of Section 13(1)(i) & (ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act.

¶21

It is the statement made across the Bar by the learned counsel for petitioner that she has filed a petition under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. seeking maintenance and which is pending on the file of the Family Court at Davanagere in Crl. Misc. No.89/2022. It is also submitted that petitioner has filed another case under the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred as ‘the Act’ for brevity) against the respondent, which is pending before the Court at Harihara. On these grounds petitioner seeks to transfer the proceedings pending at Family Court, Bengaluru to Family Court at Harihar or Davanagere.

¶22

Per contra, learned counsel for respondent contends that the petitioner has already left matrimonial home herself and minor child is in his care and custody and he is looking after welfare of the minor child. He further contends that it would be very difficult for him to travel to Harihara or Davanagere at attend the cases. He further contends that he is

¶23

¶24

CP No. 244 of 2022

¶25

ready if the matters are transferred atleast to Chithradurga, which is convenient to him.

¶26

Having heard both the learned counsel the fact remains that there are two petitions filed by the petitioner one under Section 125 of Cr.P.C., which is pending before the Family Court at Davanagere in Crl. Misc. No.89/2022 and another under the provisions of the Act, which is pending before the Court at Harihara and also MC No. 84/2022, which is pending on the file of Family Court at Davanagere preferred by the petitioner under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act. The respondent has accepted the notice in M.C. No.84/2022 and participating in the proceedings before the Court at Davanagere and Harihara.

¶27

It is to be noted that the distance between Bengaluru and Davanagere is about 250 kms. In view of the fact that the respondent is already participating the proceedings before Family Court, Davanagere, I deem it appropriate to grant relief to the petitioner and the petition deserves to the allowed.

¶28

Accordingly, I pass the following:

¶29

¶30

CP No. 244 of 2022

¶31

ORDER

¶32

a) Petition is allowed;

¶33

b) The proceedings in MC.No.126/2022 pending on the file of the V Addl. Principal Judge, Family Court at Bengaluru is ordered to be transferred to the Senior Civil Judge at Davanagere to be tried along with MC No.84/2022 which is pending before Family Court at Davanagere.

¶34

Sd/JUDGE

¶35

VK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 38

Soumya B H v. T C Nagaraja

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Soumya B H v. T C Nagaraja

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

Smt N Malashree Vs Sri C N Nagaraju

N Vivekaradhya Vs D Ramu

Sri D S Gnana Murthy Vs Sri D a Suryanarayana

Smt K Indumathi Vs Sri J Kashyap

Smt. Anitha Vs Sri. Babu K Lamani

Smt Sushma Mallesh Vs Sri. Ekantheshwara