Kavya M Vs Rudresh C G — Karnataka HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Kavya M Vs Rudresh C G — Karnataka HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Civil Petition allowed; M.C.No.413/2024 withdrawn from the file of the Family Court, Davanagere and transferred to the I Additional Principal Judge Family Court, Bengaluru, where M.C.No.3952/2025 (wife's restitution of conjugal rights petition) is pending; parties directed to appear before the transferee court on 12.11.2025 without waiting for further notice; concerned court to take appropriate steps in accordance with law if the respondent, who did not appear, fails to appear.

Issue for consideration

Whether M.C.No.413/2024 (husband's dissolution petition) pending before the Family Court, Davanagere should be withdrawn and transferred to the I Additional Principal Judge Family Court, Bengaluru, where the wife's M.C.No.3952/2025 (restitution of conjugal rights) is pending, having regard to the convenience of the wife and to avoid conflicting decisions.

Ratio / Principle

In a matrimonial case where the wife seeks transfer of proceedings by invoking Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, the paramount consideration of the Court is the convenience of the wife rather than the inconvenience that may be caused to the husband.

Key takeaways

Where the husband's dissolution petition and the wife's restitution of conjugal rights petition are pending before different courts, it is just and expedient that they be tried before the same Court so as to avoid conflicting decisions.ratio¶6
Since the petitioner-wife resides at Bengaluru and the travel distance from Bengaluru to Davanagere is around 250 kilometres one way, compelling her to travel that distance would cause her hardship and great inconvenience, warranting transfer of the Davanagere case to Bengaluru.ratio¶6
Operative direction: the parties were directed to appear before the I Additional Principal Judge Family Court, Bengaluru on 12.11.2025 without waiting for further notice; and since the respondent had not appeared before this Court, the trial court was to take appropriate steps/course in accordance with law if he did not appear.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Transfer petition under S.24 CPC - wife's convenience paramount. The petitioner-wife, a software engineer residing and working at Bengaluru, sought transfer of her husband's dissolution petition M.C.No.413/2024 from the Family Court, Davanagere to the I Additional Principal Judge Family Court, Bengaluru, where her own restitution of conjugal rights petition M.C.No.3952/2025 is pending. Held: (i) in a wife's transfer petition under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, the paramount consideration is the convenience of the wife and not the inconvenience to the husband; (ii) to avoid conflicting decisions, concurrent matrimonial proceedings ought to be tried before the same Court; (iii) the wife, residing at Bengaluru, would suffer hardship and great inconvenience in travelling around 250 kilometres one way to Davanagere. Reliance placed on N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs. A.S.Saravana Karthik Sha, Civil Appeal No.4894/2022 (para 9: generally it is the wife's convenience which must be looked at while considering transfer). Petition allowed; M.C.No.413/2024 withdrawn and transferred to Bengaluru; parties to appear before the transferee Court on 12.11.2025 without waiting for further notice. Respondent duly served but unrepresented.