Allowed

Rehana v. Mohd Insaf

Rajasthan HC20 Jan 2021CTA/12/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge transferred civil proceedings pending before Family Court No.1, Jodhpur to Family Court No.1, Bikaner. The transfer was granted to accommodate the petitioner's inability to travel alone to Jodhpur for hearings, despite the respondent offering expenses. The High Court remitted the case for consolidated hearing dates.

What did the court decide?

Transfer of Civil Misc. Case No. 774/2018 from Family Court No.1, Jodhpur to Family Court No.1, Bikaner and direction for common hearing dates.

Rehana Vs Mohd Insaf — Service and Employment | Rajasthan HC (2021)

¶1

(1 of 2)

¶2

[CTA-12/2020]

¶3

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶4

S.B. Civil Transfer Appl. No. 12/2020

¶5

Rehana W/o Sh.mohd. Insaf D/o Sh. Nathu Mohammad (Hasan Ahmed), Aged About 19 Years, B/c Pathan Musalman , R/o Near Rao Bikaji Ki Tekri , Chhipo Ka Madarsa , Bikaner

¶6

----Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

Mohd Insaf S/o Sh. Mohd. Iqbal, B/c Pathan Musalman , R/o Kaga , Opp. Police Chowki , Kaga Road , Outside Nagori Gate , Jodhpur

¶9

----Respondent

¶10

For Petitioner(s)	: Ms. Priyanka Borana.
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Gokulesh Bohra.

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI Order 20/01/2021

¶12

This transfer application has been filed by the applicant seeking transfer of proceedings pending before the Family Court No.1, Jodhpur to the Family Court No.1, Bikaner.

¶13

It is, inter alia, indicated in the application that the respondent has initiated proceedings under Section 7 of the Family Court Act, 1984 (‘the Act’) before the Family Court No.1, Jodhpur seeking restitution of conjugal rights and that the proceedings initiated by the applicant under Section 125 Cr.P.C. are pending before the Family Court No.1, Bikaner and criminal proceedings initiated against the respondent also are pending before the courts at Bikaner.

¶14

The applicant is required to travel to Jodhpur for attending hearings and that there are no male members in the family to accompany the applicant and, therefore, the proceedings be transferred from Jodhpur to Bikaner.

¶15

Learned counsel for the respondent though did not file any reply, however, made submissions that the present proceedings

¶16

(2 of 2)

¶17

[CTA-12/2020]

¶18

have been initiated by the applicant as a counter-blast to the petition filed by the respondent under Section 7 of the Act and that the respondent is prepared to make payment of the travelling expenses to the applicant. It was prayed that the application be dismissed.

¶19

I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and have perused the material available on record.

¶20

It is not in dispute that the matters are pending both at Bikaner and Jodhpur inter se parties and both the parties are required to travel from Jodhpur to Bikaner and vice-versa.

¶21

The submission made by the applicant that she has difficulty to travel alone on each date appears to be justified and in those circumstances, the proceedings pending at Jodhpur are required to be transferred to the courts at Bikaner.

¶22

Consequently, the application filed by the applicant is allowed. Civil Misc. Case No. 774/2018 pending before the Family Court No.1, Jodhpur is directed to be transferred to the Family Court No.1, Bikaner.

¶23

It is expected of the Family Court No.1, Bikaner that in all the matters pending between the parties, common date of hearing be fixed so that it is convenient for the respondent to travel.

¶24

The parties shall appear before the Family Court No.1, Bikaner on 30.01.2021, which is stated to be the date in the connected matter

¶25

The Family Court No.1, Jodhpur is directed to transmit the record immediately.

¶26

(ARUN BHANSALI),J

¶27

47-PKS/-

Rehana v. Mohd Insaf

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rehana v. Mohd Insaf

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

Sanyogita Vs Rohit Modi

Acto,W-I, Cir.-a, Sriganganagar Vs M/S Chanan Ram Satpal

Acto Ward I Circle a Sriganganagar Vs M/S Chanan Ram Satpal Sriganganagar

Shabina Bano Vs Meeru Khan

Chief Manager, R,S,R,T,C and Anr. Vs Rinku Kalal and Ors.

Rajendra Kumar Vs Ugma Devi