Allowed

Varsha Mahawar W/O Preetam Verma D/O Shri Ramswaroop Mahawar v. Preetam Verma S/O Late Shri Chandra Mohan Verma

Rajasthan HC13 Aug 2021CTA/198/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the transfer of a divorce petition filed by the husband against the wife from Family Court, Kota to Family Court, Jaipur. The court held that the wife resides in Jaipur and faces financial difficulties while her aged parents cannot support her in pursuing proceedings in Kota.

What did the court decide?

Transfer of Divorce Petition Case No.423/2019 pending in Family Court No.1, Kota to Family Court, Jaipur.

Varsha Mahawar W/O Preetam Verma D/O Shri… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Rajasthan HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Transfer Application No. 198/2019

¶3

Varsha Mahawar W/o Preetam Verma D/o Shri Ramswaroop Mahawar, Aged About 32 Years, B/c Koli, R/o C-60, Hari Marg, Malviya Nagar, Jaipur (Raj)

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

Preetam Verma S/o Late Shri Chandra Mohan Verma, Aged About 33 Years, B/c Koli, R/o 7-A-16, Mahaveer Nagar-Iii,kota (Raj)

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Abhilasha Sharma & Mr. Roshan Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Bhim Singh Meena Mr. Shiv Kumar Sharma

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESHWAR VYAS

¶10

Order

¶11

13/08/2021

¶12

The instant transfer application under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure has been filed by the wife Varsha Mahawar seeking transfer of divorce petition filed against her, by respondent-husband Preetam Verma in Family Court No.1, Kota to Family Court, Jaipur.

¶13

It is not in dispute that the parties entered into marriage on 28.11.2013 as per Hindu rites. After marriage, applicant-wife went to her parental house at Jaipur. Divorce petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short ‘Act of 1955’) was filed by respondent-husband in Family Court No.1, Kota on the ground of desertion, cruelty etc. Now, applicant-wife seeks transfer of the divorce petition from Kota to Jaipur on the ground that applicant-

¶14

(2 of 3)

¶15

[CTA-198/2019]

¶16

wife is unable to maintain herself, she is not in a position to bear expenses to attend the Court proceedings at Kota. Father of the petitioner is retired person; her old parents are not able to support her in pursuing the proceedings in Family Court at Kota.

¶17

In reply, respondent-husband denied the fact that applicant is unable to maintain herself as she is earning and can maintain herself.

¶18

As per provisions of Section 19 of the Act of 1955 every petition under this Act shall be presented to the District Court within the local limits of whose ordinary original civil jurisdiction –

¶19

(i) the marriage was solemnised, or

¶20

(ii) the respondent, at the time of the presentation of the petition, resides, or

¶21

(iii) the parties to the marriage last resided together, or

¶22

(iiia) in case the wife is the petitioner, where she is residing on the date of presentation of the petition, or

¶23

(iv) the petitioner is residing at the time of the presentation of the petition, in a case where the respondent is, at that time, residing outside the territories to which this Act extends, or has not been heard of as being alive for a period of seven years or more by those persons who would naturally have heard of him if he were alive.

¶24

A bare look at the above provisions reveals that the legislature has given preference to wife regarding the place where petition for divorce can be presented. In case, petitioner is wife then divorce petition may be presented where she is residing on the day of filing of the petition, whereas, no such option has been given to husband, who has to choose either of the Courts, in whose local limits, either the marriage was solemnized or

¶25

(3 of 3)

¶26

[CTA-198/2019]

¶27

respondent resides or parties to the marriage last resided together.

¶28

In the present case, at the time of filing the present transfer application, applicant-wife was residing at Jaipur, who as per her contention is unable to maintain herself; she is residing with her old aged parents, who are also unable to accompany her in travelling to Kota for defending the divorce petition filed against her. There is no material available on record, which shows that applicant-wife can maintain herself.

¶29

In view of above circumstances, the balance of convenience lies in favour of the wife.

¶30

Resultantly, the present transfer application is allowed. Case No.423/2019 titled as “Preetam Verma Vs. Varsha Mahavar” pending in the Family Court No.1, Kota is ordered to be transferred to the Family Court, Jaipur.

¶31

Let the parties may appear before the Family Court, Jaipur on 13.09.2021 and thereafter, the Family Court, Jaipur would regulate the hearing.

¶32

A copy of this order be sent to the Family Court No.1, Kota as well as Family Court No.1, Jaipur for information and necessary compliance.

¶33

(RAMESHWAR VYAS),J

¶34

Anil

Varsha Mahawar W/O Preetam Verma D/O Shri Ramswaroop Mahawar v. Preetam Verma S/O Late Shri Chandra Mohan Verma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Varsha Mahawar W/O Preetam Verma D/O Shri Ramswaroop Mahawar v. Preetam Verma S/O Late Shri Chandra Mohan Verma

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

Ramdhan Phagedia S/O Late Shri Gullaram Jat Vs Smt Nangi Devi W/O Late Shri Trilokram Jat

Reena D/O Suresh Gautam Vs Piyush Urf Monu S/O Girraj Prasad

Lokesh Kumar S/O Shri Tulsi Vs Smt. Sunita W/O Shri Lokesh D/O Shri Prahlad

Anuradha W/O Sh.Sameer Haldhani D/O Late Sh. Murari Lal Sain. Vs Sameer Haldani S/O Shri Kamlesh Haldhani

M/S Indian Tube Mills and Metals Ind Ltd. Vs Astt Commissioner Works Contract and Lea

Smt Shanti Devi Vs State