Smt. Sandhya Nama W/O Ramballabh Nama D/O Satish… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Rajasthan HC (2025)

Smt. Sandhya Nama W/O Ramballabh Nama D/O Satish… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Rajasthan HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Transfer of matrimonial case No.95/2024 from the Family Court, Sawai Madhopur to the Court of the Additional District Judge No.10, HQ Sanganer, Jaipur Metropolitan-I, Jaipur, for the petitioner-wife's convenience; the new court directed to assign a date of appearance and transmit the record at the earliest; the transfer petition and other miscellaneous applications disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether the pending matrimonial case No.95/2024 filed by the respondent-husband under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 before the Family Court, Sawai Madhopur should be transferred to the Court of the Additional District Judge No.10, HQ Sanganer, Jaipur Metropolitan-I, Jaipur, where the petitioner-wife resides after breakdown of the marriage. +1 more

Court's answer

Considering the entire analogy behind convenience to a female litigant (encompassing her residence after marital breakdown and her financial dependence), the Court found it appropriate to allow the transfer application and to transfer the pending matrimonial case as per the petitioner's convenience, relying on the cited Supreme Court and coordinate-bench precedents.

Ratio / Principle

The transfer application was allowed: case No.95/2024 was withdrawn from the Family Court, Sawai Madhopur and assigned and transferred to the Court of the Additional District Judge No.10, HQ Sanganer, Jaipur Metropolitan-I, Jaipur, which was further directed to assign a date of appearance and transmit the record at the earliest.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Transfer of matrimonial proceedings — convenience of wife. The wife-petitioner sought transfer of her husband's pending divorce petition (case No.95/2024) under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 from the Family Court, Sawai Madhopur to the Court of the Additional District Judge No.10, HQ Sanganer, Jaipur Metropolitan-I, Jaipur, where she resided after breakdown of the marriage, pleading that she was non-earning and financially dependent on her family and that the Sawai Madhopur filing was to harass her. The Court relied on Sumita Singh v. Kumar Sanjay (AIR 2002 SC 396), Vimi Mathur v. Vikas Mathur ((2004) 13 SCC 435) and Gargi Konar v. Jagjeet Singh ((2005) 11 SCC 446), in which the Supreme Court allowed transfer petitions solely on the ground of the wife's convenience, and on the coordinate-bench ruling in Smt. Vinita v. Himanshu (AIR 2017 Raj. 102) that transfers normally lean in favour of the wife on grounds of convenience, cost and comfort. Considering the entire analogy behind convenience to a female litigant, the Court allowed the transfer application, withdrew case No.95/2024 from Sawai Madhopur, assigned it to the named Jaipur court, and directed fixation of an early date of appearance and transmission of the record. Respondent served but unrepresented.

[2025:RJ-JP:9735]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Civil Transfer Application No. 36/2025

Smt. Sandhya Nama W/o Ramballabh Nama D/o Satish Nama Meratwal (Agra Wale), Aged About 37 Years, Presently Residing At Plot No. 28, Namdev Colony-B, Sanganer, District Jaipur (Rajasthan)

----Petitioner

Versus

Ramballabh Nama S/o Shri Babu Lal Ji Nama, Aged About 40 Years, R/o New Market City, Sawai Madhopur.

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Rekha Gupta & Ms. Jashoda Sharma For Respondent(s) : None present

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN

Order

04/03/2025

None present for the respondent, despite service of notice.

Service complete.

The instant S.B. Civil Transfer Application is preferred by the petitioner (wife) to transfer a pending matrimonial case No.95/2024 filed by respondent (husband) under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act of 1955’), from the Family Court, Sawai Madhopur to the Court of the Additional District Judge No.10, HQ Sanganer, Jaipur MetropolitanI, Jaipur.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has filed this transfer application to transfer a matrimonial case to the place wherein she is residing after breakdown of marriage.

(2 of 3)

[2025:RJ-JP:9735]

[CTA-36/2025]

She further submits that to harass the petitioner, a case has been filed by the respondent at Sawai Madhopur. She further submits that the petitioner is non-earning and she is financially dependent upon her family, therefore, it would be inconvenient for her to attend case in different jurisdiction.

None present for the respondent to oppose the present transfer petition. 6. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the material available on record. 7. In cases of Sumita Singh Vs. Kumar Sanjay and Anr. : AIR 2002 (SC) 396 , Vimi Mathur Vs. Vikas Mathur (2004) 13 SCC 435 and Gargi Konar v Jagjeet Singh (2005) 11 SCC 446 Hon’ble Supreme Court considering transfer petition and allowed the same only on the ground of convenience of wife. In case of Smt. Vinita Vs. Himanshu :AIR 2017 Raj. 102 , a Coordinate Bench of this Court while considering the transfer petition filed by wife to transfer a matrimonial proceedings from one place to another has observed that normal practice of the Courts in matter of transfer is to lean in favour of wife on the ground of convenience, cost and comfort of wife.

Considering entire analogy behind convenience to a female litigant, it is appropriate to allow the transfer application and to transfer the case as per convenience of the petitioner.

In view of aforesaid, the transfer application is hereby allowed and the case No.95/2024 is withdrawn from the Family Court, Sawai Madhopur and assigned and transferred to the Court

[2025:RJ-JP:9735]

[CTA-36/2025]

(3 of 3)

of the Additional District Judge No.10, HQ Sanganer, Jaipur Metropolitan-I, Jaipur.

The concerned Court is directed to assign a date of appearance before the new Court and transmit the record at earliest.

With the aforesaid, the transfer petition and the other misc. application stand disposed of.

(ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J

MR/61