Smt. Sonali Punit Sanadi Vs Shri. Punit Sanadi

SMT. SONALI PUNIT SANADI, W/O. PUNIT SANADI, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, R/O. DAMBAL PLOT, NEAR LIC OFFICE, CHIKKODI, BELAGAVI DISTRICT - 591 201. PRESENTLY AT WOMEN POLICE EMPLOYEES GUEST HOUSE, ANANDARAO CIRCLE, SHESHADRIPURAM, BANGALORE - 560 009.

¶12

…PETITIONER

¶13

(BY SRI. CHETAN DESAI., ADVOCATE)

¶14

(BY SRI. CHETAN DESAI., ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by PADMASHREE AND: SHEKHAR DESAI SHRI. PUNIT SANADI, Location: High Court of S/O. SULOCHANA SANADI, Karnataka AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/O NO.410, AMBEDKAR GALLI, KANBARGI TALUK, BELAGAVI - 590 015.

¶15

…RESPONDENT

¶16

(NOTICE TO RESPONDENT IS HELD SUFFICIENT VIDE ORDER DATED 21.07.2026)

¶17

2 -

¶18

HC-KAR

¶19

NC: 2026:KHC:37474 CP No. 200 of 2026

¶20

CNR: KAHC010423422026

¶21

THIS CP IS FILED U/S. 24 OF CPC PRAYING TO WITHDRAW THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN MC NO.640/25 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE HONBLE IST ADDITIONAL PRL. JUDGE, FAMILY COURT AT BELAGAVI AND TO TRANSFER THE SAME TO THE PRL. FAMILY JUDGE AT BENGALURU.

¶22

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶23

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA

¶24

ORAL ORDER

¶25

Learned counsel for the petitioner is present and filed a memo stating that he served notice to the respondent through hand summons on 15.07.2026 but the respondent nor his counsel did not turn up and placed ex-parte.

¶26

This transfer petition is filed by wife for transfer of M.C.No.640/2025 filed by husband before the I Additional Principal Judge, Family Court at Belagavi to Principal Family Court at Bengaluru.

¶27

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner stated that she is recently recruited as Constable on 20.04.2025 and she is a probationary Police Constable. It is very difficult for her to get

¶28

HC-KAR

¶29

NC: 2026:KHC:37474 CP No. 200 of 2026

¶30

3 -

¶31

CNR: KAHC010423422026

¶32

the leave to attend the case at Belagavi, which is at a distance of 506 Kilometers. It is stated that respondent is using influence of his cousin who claims to be President of the SC & ST organization and as such, the petitioner apprehends threat to her life and she is having a minor child aged of 5 years. Respondent is a Government employee working in Health Department.

¶33

4. Considering the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioner, in the absence of respondent's arguments and also in view of the recent recruitment and the distance between both the places, this Court finds that it is just and reasonable to transfer M.C.No.640/2025 from I Additional Principal Judge, Family Court at Belagavi to the Principal Family Court Judge at Bengaluru.

¶34

5. As it is stated that respondent is a Government employee, the Family Court at Bengaluru is directed not to insist upon his presence unless there is any requirement and he is permitted to appear either through video conference or can

¶35