Dismissed

Ratna Besan v. Tularam Besan

Orissa HC17 Feb 2022TRP(C)/38/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court rejected the petitioner's plea to transfer her matrimonial proceedings from Jharsuguda to Sambalpur. The transfer was denied due to lack of material proving police complaints regarding threats and the short travel distance. Liberty was granted to approach the SP for protection before court appearances.

What did the court decide?

Transfer of matrimonial proceedings from Senior Civil Judge, Jharsuguda to Family Court, Sambalpur dismissed. Liberty granted to approach SP; travel expenses orderable on application.

Ratna Besan Vs Tularam Besan — Matrimonial and Divorce | Orissa HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

TRP (C) No.38 of 2022

Ratna Besan

Petitioner

-versus-

Tularam Besan

…. Opposite Party

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

THE JUSTICE S.PUJAHARI

ORDER

Order No.

17.02.2022

This matter is taken up through Hybrid mode.

¶15

This petition has been filed by the Petitioner for transfer of C.S. (Matrimonial) No.55 of 2021 instituted at the instance of the Opposite Party-husband from the file of Senior Civil Judge, Jharsuguda to the court of Judge, Family Court, Sambalpur.

¶16

3. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner.

¶17

The Petitioner has sought for transfer of the aforesaid case from the file of Senior Civil Judge, Jharsuguda to the court of Judge, Family Court, Sambalpur on the ground that she being a lady unable to attend the court there as the same is located at a long distance from her native place and she is also being threatened by the Opposite Party-husband. Therefore, for a free and fair trial, the case be transferred from the file of Senior Civil Judge, Jharsuguda to the court of Judge, Family Court,

¶18

Page 1 of 2

¶19

// 2 //

¶20

Sambalpur. But no material has been produced indicating that she has made any allegation before the police with regard to such threat extended to her. Both the places are well connected and it hardly takes one hour to reach the court at Jharsuguda from Sambalpur. Therefore, the contention of the Petitioner on which the transfer of the aforesaid case is sought for appears to be without any substance.

¶21

Accordingly, the TRP(C) stands dismissed.

¶22

However, liberty is given to the Petitioner to approach the Superintendent of Police, Jharsuguda well ahead of the date of her appearance with a copy of this order to render her necessary protection on the date she is required to attend the court at Jharsuguda if she apprehends any threat to her life or limb from the side of the opposite party, she may approach the S.P. concerned in order to enable him to assess the threat perception on her and give necessary protection, if required.

¶23

However, if the Petitioner-wife claims travel expenses by filing an application, the court concerned shall pass necessary order on the same.

¶24

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.

¶25

(S. Pujahari) Judge

¶26

PKS

Ratna Besan v. Tularam Besan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ratna Besan v. Tularam Besan

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

Sujata Mallik Vs Sandeep Kumar Mallik

Sasmita Sethy Vs Alok Ranjan Sethi

Nitya Ku.Praharaj Vs B.M.,Indusind Bank

Suresh Prasad Singh Vs State of Odisha

Amaresh Sahoo Vs R.T.O.,Cuttack

Rangadhar Sahoo Vs R.T.O., Cuttack