Allowed

Neha Singh W/O Shri Sunil Kumar D/O Shri Mahipal Singh Dhaka, v. Shri Sunil Kumar S/O Shri Jagdish Prasad

Rajasthan HC6 Aug 2021CTA/9/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a transfer application under Section 24 CPC to move a divorce petition from Family Court, Sikar to Family Court, Ajmer. The court found that transferring the case would cause minimal inconvenience to the respondent husband in Jaipur while relieving significant hardship for the petitioner working in Ajmer, given her health and safety concerns.

What did the court decide?

The divorce petition pending at Family Court, Sikar (CIS No. 138/2020) is transferred to Family Court, Ajmer.

Neha Singh W/O Shri Sunil Kumar D/O Shri Mahipal… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Rajasthan HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S. B. Civil Transfer Application No. 9/2021

¶3

Neha Singh W/o Shri Sunil Kumar D/o Shri Mahipal Singh Dhaka, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Behind Maru Girls College, Fatehpur Road, Sikar, Tehsil And District Sikar, Presently Residing At Flat No. 111, Nakshatra Apartment, Gyan Vihar, Near Bk Kaul Nagar, Kotra, Ajmer-305001

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

Shri Sunil Kumar S/o Shri Jagdish Prasad, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Ganpati Plaza Ke Samne Wali Gali, Near Railway Overbridge, Piprali Road, Sikar,

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Nathu Singh Chauhan For Respondent(s) : Mr. M.S. Saharan

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESHWAR VYAS

¶10

Order

¶11

August 6, 2021

¶12

The instant transfer application under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 has been preferred by the applicant-wife seeking transfer of the divorce petition filed under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (afterwards referred to as “the Act of 1955”) for dissolution of marriage bearing CIS No. 138/2020 titled as “Sunil Kumar Vs. Neha Singh” from Family Court, Sikar to Family Court, Ajmer.

¶13

As per averments made in the application, the marriage between the applicant and the non-applicant was solemnized on 30.04.2012 at Sikar in accordance with Hindu rites; thereafter, both of them started living together as husband and wife at Sikar. The applicant came to be appointed on the post of Assistant

¶14

(2 of 6)

¶15

[CTA-9/2021]

¶16

Manager Scale – I in Baroda Rajasthan Kshetriya Gramin Bank in the year 2016 and remained posted at Sikar upto October, 2020. The applicant resided with her in-laws at Sikar in her matrimonial home while she was posted at Sikar. Presently, she is working on the post of Manager Scale – II in the Head Office of Baroda Rajasthan Kshetriya Gramin Bank at Ajmer and is residing there. The non-applicant and his parent started taunting at the applicant for extraneous reasons without any fault on her part. When the family situation at her matrimonial home became unbearable, applicant having no option submitted an application before the higher authorities of the Bank seeking her transfer from Sikar to Ajmer in the month of July, 2020. The applicant sought transfer under the belief that after her transfer from Sikar, the family situation will get normalized. The non-applicant after resigning from Modi Institute, Laxmangarh in the year 2017, has joined the multinational company at Jaipur. In the month of July, 2020, when the applicant sought transfer from Sikar to Ajmer, the nonapplicant with malafide intention filed the divorce petition under Section 13(1)(i-a)(i-b) of the Act of 1955 seeking dissolution of marriage before the Family Court, Sikar on the basis of false allegations on 28.07.2020. The father of the applicant is a retired employee of National Textile Corporation, a Public Sector Undertaking. In such circumstances, it is very difficult for the applicant to travel from Ajmer to Sikar to attend the family court proceedings as she has to take leave on each date of hearing. The applicant is suffering from back ache and has been advised to avoid jerks and travelling and therefore, it is very difficult and strenuous for the applicant to travel from Ajmer to Sikar from time to time for attending the court proceedings. Besides, the

¶17

(3 of 6)

¶18

[CTA-9/2021]

¶19

applicant has reasonable apprehension that her in-laws and husband can threaten and pressurize her while attending the court proceedings at Sikar. The non-applicant is serving at Jaipur and if the divorce petition filed by him is transferred to Family Court, Ajmer then, there will not be any harassment to him. The balance of convenience lies in favour of the applicant. On the above grounds, the present transfer petition has been filed by the applicant.

¶20

In reply, it is submitted that the applicant has not come before this Court with clean hands. She at her own will sought transfer from Sikar to Ajmer. While denying the allegations levelled against the non-applicant, it is submitted that the prescription slips are of suggestive nature to avoid excessive travelling. The prescription slips submitted by the applicant are fabricated documents. The applicant’s family is permanent resident of Sikar City for last more than 40 years. The applicant was born in Sikar and studied in Sikar. Her grand-parents are having self built palatial house. The applicant also worked in BRKG Bank, Sikar from November, 2014 to October, 2020 without any fear from the non-applicant or his parents. It is also averred that the principle of convenience of Fora should not be left at the will of the parties. The interest of justice has to be paramount and unnecessary burden should not be put on husband to facilitate estranged wife. On these premises, the non-applicant-husband prayed to dismiss the transfer application filed by the applicantwife.

¶21

The rejoinder to the reply has been filed by the applicant denying the allegations made by the husband in his reply. In the rejoinder, it is stated that the applicant and her family members

¶22

(4 of 6)

¶23

[CTA-9/2021]

¶24

are permanent residents of Village Nathasar, District Jhunjhunu. It is denied that grant-parents of the applicant are having palatial house at Sikar. It is submitted that the applicant has been forced to move out of her matrimonial home situated at Sikar; she has filed a complaint under Section 12 read with Sections 17, 18, 19, 20, 22 & 23 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 before the court of learned Judicial Magistrate No. 3, Ajmer. She has also filed an application under Section 9 of the Act of 1955 before the Family Court at Ajmer, which is pending for adjudication. On these premises, the applicant has prayed for allowing the transfer petition.

¶25

Learned counsel for the applicant has relied on the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of “ Shruti Kaushal Bisht Vs. Kaushal R. Bisht” (Transfer Petition (Civil) No. 1264 of 2019) decided on 06.11.2020 .

¶26

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record.

¶27

Learned counsel for the applicant seeks transfer of divorce petition pending at Family Court Sikar on the grounds narrated in the pleadings. On the other hand, learned counsel for the nonapplicant submits that both the parties are native of Sikar. The native place of the applicant, though, situated in District Jhunjhunu is only 22 kms. far from Sikar. The witnesses of the applicant also belong to Sikar. The proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act and under Section 9 of the Act of 1955 were instituted afterwards. The application seeking transfer filed without reasonable basis is liable to be dismissed.

¶28

Learned counsel for the non-applicant has relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of “Krishna

¶29

(5 of 6)

¶30

[CTA-9/2021]

¶31

Veni Nagam Vs. Harish Nagam reported in (2017) 4

¶32

Supreme Court Cases 150 .

¶33

In the present case, it is not in dispute that the applicant is posted as Manager Scale – II in the Head Office of Baroda Rajasthan Kshetriya Gramin Bank, Ajmer and is residing in Ajmer. It is also not in dispute that her native place is near Sikar but her father was working in the National Textile Corporation, a Public Sector Undertaking, at the time of her marriage. He was posted at Burhanpur (M.P.) and now he is retired. It is not in dispute that the applicant moved an application to the Head Office seeking transfer from Sikar to Ajmer. She explained the circumstances under which she took this decision. It is also not in dispute that non-applicant has filed the petition under Section 13 of the Act of 1955 at Sikar in the month of July, 2020 seeking divorce from the applicant on the grounds of cruelty, desertion etc. The applicant in person is attending the court proceedings. As per prescription slips submitted by the applicant, she is suffering from back ache and has been advised to avoid excessive travelling. In the above circumstances, great inconvenience will be caused to the applicant in defending the divorce petition at Sikar, which is about 250 kms. away from Ajmer.

¶34

The contention of the non-applicant that the applicant herself was responsible for her posting at Ajmer is not acceptable. The applicant in her application has narrated the circumstances under which she had applied for transfer from Sikar to Ajmer. It is also not in dispute that the applicant has also filed an application under Section 9 of the Act of 1955 and also initiated the proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act against the non-applicant at Ajmer, which are pending for adjudication, in which the non-

¶35

(6 of 6) [CTA-9/2021]

¶36

applicant is required to come at Ajmer and defend the proceedings. It is also not in dispute that at present, the nonapplicant is employed at Jaipur in a private company. The distance between Jaipur to Ajmer is about 150 kms. only, whereas, the distance between Ajmer to Sikar is about 250 kms. Comparing the distance between the above places, this Court is of the opinion that no inconvenience will be caused to the nonapplicant-husband if he attends the court proceedings at Ajmer instead of Sikar.

¶37

Resultantly, the present transfer petition is allowed. The case bearing CIS No. 138/2020 titled as “Sunil Kumar Vs. Neha Singh” pending in the Family Court, Sikar is ordered to be transferred to the Family Court, Ajmer.

¶38

Let the parties may appear before the Family Court, Ajmer on 06.09.2021 and thereafter, the Family Court, Ajmer would regulate the hearing.

¶39

A copy of this order be sent to the Family Court, Sikar as well as Family Court, Ajmer for information and necessary compliance.

¶40

(RAMESHWAR VYAS),J

¶41

INDER NEBHWANI /

Neha Singh W/O Shri Sunil Kumar D/O Shri Mahipal Singh Dhaka, v. Shri Sunil Kumar S/O Shri Jagdish Prasad

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Neha Singh W/O Shri Sunil Kumar D/O Shri Mahipal Singh Dhaka, v. Shri Sunil Kumar S/O Shri Jagdish Prasad

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rekha W/O Vikram Vs Vikram S/O Bhagirath

Bank of Baroda Vs M/S R K Polytex Pvt. Ltd. and Ors.

Smt. Manbhar Bai D/O Laxminarayan , W/O Ashok Kumar Vs Ashok Kumar S/O Madanlal

Smt. Lataa Nawani W/O Himanshu Nanwani, D/O Ishawar Chand Devnani, Vs Himanshu Nawani S/O Ashok Nanwani

I.D.F.C. First Bank Ltd. (Earlier Known as Idfc Bank Ltd.) through Manager, Vs Dr. Aruna Bamniya (Kundara) W/O Dr. Manoj Bamniya

Sanjay Kumar Jain S/O Jai Kumar Jain Vs Smt. Rajesh Kanwar W/O Bhawani Singh