Allowed

Smt. G Sheela v. Dr. Chandrashekar S D

Karnataka HC10 Feb 2023CP/394/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a civil petition under Section 24 CPC, the Court allowed the wife to transfer the husband's restitution of conjugal rights petition from Maddur to Mysuru to be tried with her pending maintenance suit, citing hardship and convenience for her and minor children.

What did the court decide?

Transfer of M.C.No.13/2022 (Restitution of Conjugal Rights) from Senior Civil Judge, Maddur to III Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Mysuru, to be tried with C.Misc.854/2021.

Smt. G Sheela Vs Dr. Chandrashekar S D — Matrimonial and Divorce | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

CP No. 394 of 2022

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 10^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR

¶7

CIVIL PETITION NO.394 OF 2022

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SMT.G.SHEELA

¶10

W/O.DR.CHANDRASHEKAR S.D. AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS

¶11

C.S.ANANYA GOWDA D/O.DR.CHANDRASHEKAR S.D. AGED ABOUT 7 YEARS

¶12

C.S. ANUSHKA GOWDA D/O.DR.CHANDRASHEKAR S.D. AGED ABOUT 7 YEARS

¶13

ALL ARE PRESENTLY R/AT NO.3029, SAJJAD ALI STREET 1^ST CROSS, MANDI MOHALLA MYSURU – 577 001

¶14

…PETITIONERS

¶15

Digitally signed by B LAVANYA

¶16

Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶17

(BY SRI N.K.RAMESH, ADVOCATE)

¶18

AND:

¶19

DR.CHANDRASHEKAR S.D. S/O.LATE DASE GOWDA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS R/AT K.SHETTIHALLI MADDUR TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT – 571 422

¶20

ALSO WORKING AS MEDICAL OFFICER PRIMARY HEALTH CENTRE

¶21

¶22

CP No. 394 of 2022

¶23

GUTTALU MANDYA DISTRICT – 571 404

¶24

…RESPONDENT

¶25

(BY SRI SYED AKBAR PASHA FOR SRI MAHANTESH S.HOSMATH, ADVOCATES)

¶26

¶27

THIS CIVIL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 24 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908, PRAYING TO TRANSFER M.C.NO.13/2022 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 9 OF THE HINDU MARRIAGE ACT, 1955, PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, MADDURU TO III ADDITIONAL PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT AT MYSURU, WHERE MISC.NO.854/2021 FILED BY THE PETITIONER UNDER SECTION 125 OF THE CR.P.C. IS PENDING CONSIDERATION, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶28

ORDER

¶29

This petition is preferred by the wife seeking transfer of matrimonial proceedings filed by the respondent-husband in MC.No.13/2022 filed for restitution of conjugal rights pending on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Maddur to III Additional Principal Judge, Family Court at Mysuru, to be tried along with C.Misc.854/2021.

¶30

It is the contention of learned counsel for petitioners

¶31

that the wife has preferred a petition under Section 125 of Cr.PC for maintenance of herself and her twin minor daughters in C.Mis.No.854/2021 pending before III Additional Principal

¶32

¶33

CP No. 394 of 2022

¶34

Judge, Family Court at Mysuru. It is the further contention of learned counsel for petitioners that since the petitioner-wife is not having any source of income, she has to depend on her brother and she would also incur huge expenditure to appear for the Court proceedings at Madduru. Therefore, it would cause difficulty and hardship to the wife to travel from Mysuru to Madduru along with her twin minor daughters. Hence, she seeks to transfer the petition filed by the husband before the Family Court at Madduru to the Family Court at Mysuru.

¶35

Sri Syed Akbar Pasha, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Sri Mahantesh S.Hosmath for respondent, vehemently objects for the matter being transferred.

¶36

Since the petition filed by the wife under Section 125 of Cr.PC is pending before III Additional Principal Judge, Family Court at Mysuru, I do not find any legal impediment to transfer the case pending before the Senior Civil Judge at Madduru in MC.No.13/2022 to III Additional Principal Judge, Family Court at Mysuru for adjudication. It is also apparently seen that less amount of hardship would be caused to the respondenthusband in traveling to Mysuru to attend the aforesaid cases

¶37

¶38

CP No. 394 of 2022

¶39

rather than the wife attending the case at Madduru preferred by the respondent-husband seeking restitution.

¶40

Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:

¶41

ORDER

¶42

i) Petition is allowed; ii) The matrimonial proceedings filed by the respondent-husband in MC.No.13/2022 filed for restitution of conjugal rights pending on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Maddur, is ordered to be transferred to III Additional Principal Judge, Family Court at Mysuru and the same to be tried along with C.Misc.No.854/2021, which is preferred by the wife pending on the file of III Additional Principal Judge, Family Court at Mysuru.

¶43

SdJUDGE

¶44

LB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 30

Smt. G Sheela v. Dr. Chandrashekar S D

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. G Sheela v. Dr. Chandrashekar S D

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

Lrs of Wahid Baig Vs Sri Chamaraju

Smt. S Sandya Vs Sri Raghavendra C

Sri.M.Koteshwara Reddy Vs the State of Karnataka

Mr Mohammed Maaz Shariff Vs the Robin Hood Project Trust

Jain Heritage School Vs State of Karnataka

Basappa S/O Mallappa Ganiger Since Deceased by His Lrs Gourawwa W/O Chennaveerappa Matti and Other Vs the Assistant Commissioner and Others