Allowed

Smt P Nagashri W/O K Vinaykumar v. Sri K Vinaykumar S/O K Vijrakumara Swamy

Karnataka HC5 Aug 2024CP/100089/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka allowed a civil petition for transfer of matrimonial proceedings and maintenance petition from Kudligi to Hagari Bommanahalli. Considering the petitioner's residence, her minor child, and the convenience of both parties, the court directed withdrawal of pending matters from the original courts and transfer to the designated court.

What did the court decide?

Transfer of M.C. 19/2023, M.C. 75/2023, and Crl. Misc. 903/2023 from Kudligi and Hoovina Hadagali to Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Hagari Bommanahalli.

Smt P Nagashri W/O K Vinaykumar Vs Sri K… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC-D:11038 CP No. 100089 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 5^TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V.HOSMANI

¶7

CIVIL PETITION NO.100089 OF 2024

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SMT. P. NAGASHRI W/O. K. VINAYKUMAR, D/O. MALLANNA PARASHETTI, AGE: 28 YEARS, OCC: SOFTWARE ENGINEER, R/O: 780, WARD NO 5, MAILARA ROAD, OPP. BSNL OFFICE, HADAGALI TOWN AND TALUK, VIJAYANAGARA DIST – 583 212.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SMT. RESHMA MADIWALARA, ADVOCATE FOR SRI T. HANUMAREDDY, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶14

SRI K. VINAYKUMAR S/O. K. VIJRAKUMARA SWAMY, AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: SOFTWARE ENGINEER, R/O: CHORNUR ROAD, KUDLIGI TOWN AND TALUK, VIJAYANAGARA DIST – 583 212.

¶15

(BY SRI K.S.KARISHETTAR, ADVOCATE)

¶16

…RESPONDENT

¶17

THIS CIVIL PETITION IS FILED U/SEC.24 OF CPC, PRAYING TO WITHDRAW THE M.C.NO.19/2023 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE FIRST CLASS AT KUDLIGI AND TRANSFER THE SAME TO THE LEARNED SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE FIRST CLASS, H.B.HALLI, ITINERARY SITTING AT HOOVINA HADAGALI FOR DISPOSAL IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.

¶18

THIS CIVIL PETITION IS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶19

2 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:11038 CP No. 100089 of 2024

¶20

ORAL ORDER

¶21

This petition is filed for transfer of proceedings in M.C.no.19/2023 on file of Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Kudligi to Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Hagari Bommanahalli, Itinerary Court sitting at Hoovina Hadagali.

¶22

Smt.Reshma Madiwalar, learned counsel appearing for Sri T.Hanumareddy, learned counsel for petitioner submitted that marriage of petitioner and respondent was solemnized on 08.01.2021 at Hoovina Hadagali, Vijaya Nagar District as per Hindu customs. Subsequent to marriage, she joined respondent at Kudligi and led marital life. From wedlock, a child by name Poornashree was born to them. However, thereafter due to marital discord between them, she was forced to reside with her mother. In meanwhile, respondent had filed M.C.no.19/2023 under Section 13(i) (ia) of Hindu Marriage Act for dissolution of their marriage. It was submitted, said petition was filed at Kudligi, which was about 60 km from her place of residence requiring her to travel from her village to nearest town and onward to Court. As she was finding it extremely difficult due to fact that she had a minor child and also ailing mother, instant petition was filed for transfer. It was also

¶23

3 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:11038 CP No. 100089 of 2024

¶24

submitted, petitioner had filed Crl.Misc.no.903/2023 before Civil Judge and JMFC, Hoovina Hadagali, seeking for maintenance. She had also filed petition under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act i.e., M.C.no.75/2023, which was also pending before Senior Civil Judge and JMFC at Hagari Bommanahalli. It was submitted, since respondent was attending these two matters at Hoovina Hadagali, respondent would not be prejudiced by transfer. On said grounds, sought for allowing writ petition.

¶25

On other hand Sri K.S.Korishettar, learned counsel for respondent sought to oppose writ petition. It was submitted, petition for restitution as well as petition for maintenance were filed by petitioner herein apparently after receipt of notice of petition for divorce filed by respondent. Therefore, there was no bona-fide in petition. It was further submitted, matters were pending before Itinerary Court which would take considerably long duration to conclude and in any case, distance between two places being only 60 k.m and petitioner would be required to attend only at time of trial, there was no merit in petition and sought for dismissal.

¶26

4 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:11038 CP No. 100089 of 2024

¶27

4. Heard learned counsel.

¶28

In a petition for transfer, convenience of wife to

¶29

conduct proceedings would be of primary consideration. In instant case, though it would appear that petitioner had filed petition for maintenance as well as for restitution after filing of petition for divorce by respondent/husband. But fact that she is having a minor child and would require attending proceedings at two different places, would be a factor to be taken into account. At same time, since proceedings filed by her were pending before Itinerary Court and not regular Court, they might take long duration for disposal as pointed out by learned counsel for respondent would also be a factor to be considered. In view of above, as Hagari Bommanahalli would be midway for both parties and as parties have expressed consent through counsel for transfer for Hagari Bommanahalli, I pass following:

¶30

ORDER

¶31

i) Civil Petition is allowed.

¶32

ii) Proceedings in M.C.no.19/2023 on file of Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Kudligi as well as proceedings in M.C.no.75/2023 on file of Senior Civil Judge at Hagari Bommanahalli

¶33

5 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:11038 CP No. 100089 of 2024

¶34

(itinerary sitting at Hoovina Hadagali) and Crl.Misc.no.903/2023 pending before Civil Judge and JMFC, Hoovina Hadagali, stand withdrawn and transferred to Court of Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Hagari Bommanahalli.

¶35

iii) Respective Courts are directed to transmit records to said Court well before date of appearance indicated herein below.

¶36

iv) Both parties shall appear before Court of Senior Civil Judge and JMFC at Hagari Bommanahalli on 10.09.2024.

¶37

v) Registry to forthwith send copy of this order to Court of Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Kudligi as well as Senior Civil Judge at Hagari Bommanahalli (Itinerary sitting at Hoovina Hadagali) and Civil Judge and JMFC, Hoovina Hadagali for transfer of respective records.

¶38

vi) Transferee Court is requested to expedite disposal of matters as far as possible within a period of one year, but in accordance with law.

¶39

Sd/(RAVI V.HOSMANI) JUDGE

¶40

AM/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 24

Smt P Nagashri W/O K Vinaykumar v. Sri K Vinaykumar S/O K Vijrakumara Swamy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt P Nagashri W/O K Vinaykumar v. Sri K Vinaykumar S/O K Vijrakumara Swamy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Prakash Basappa Hosagouder Vs the Special Land Acquisition Officer

Yamanavva W/O. Late Ningappa Bhoovi Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. Geenagara Rajesha S/O Geenagara Venkanna Vs the Managing Director

Shri Pramod S/O Appasaheb Jadhav Vs the State of Karnataka

Sushila Naik W/O Ramesh Naik @ Sushila Bhimappa Nilajagi Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Yallappa S/O Nagappa Koravar Vs the State of Karnataka