Karnataka High Court
Smt Bhagyashree vs Sunil on 27 February, 2024
Author: S Sunil Dutt Yadav
Bench: S Sunil Dutt Yadav
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:7961
CP No.433 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV
CIVIL PETITION NO.433 OF 2022
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. BHAGYASHREE
WIFE OF SUNIL
D/O GUDDAPPA
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS
HOUSE WIFE
R/AT WARD NO.11, MULLAN KERI
Digitally signed BASAVESHWARA NAGARA
by VIJAYA P HAVERI.
Location: HIGH ...PETITIONER
COURT OF
KARNATAKA (BY SRI. M.R. HIREMATHAD, ADV.,)
AND:
1. SUNIL
S/O LAKSHMANA
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS
AGRICULTURIST
R/OF. KODURU VILLAGE
HOSANAGARA TALUK
SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-577418.
...RESPONDENT
(RESPONDENT SERVED)
THIS CIVIL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SEC.24 OF CPC,
PRAYING TO PASS AN ORDER TO WITHDRAWAL AND
TRANSFER OF THE PETITION IN M.C.NO.35/2022 ON THE FILE
OF HONBLE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT HOSANAGARA
TO THE FILE OF HONBLE FAMILY COURT AT HAVERI PASS
SUCH OTHER APPROPRIATE JUDGMENT OR ORDER/S AS THIS
HONBLE COURT DEEMS FIT UNDER FACTS AND
CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE
AND EQUITY.
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:7961
CP No.433 of 2022
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Petitioner - Wife has sought for withdrawal of the proceedings in M.C.No. 35/2022 pending on the file of the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Hosanagara, and has sought for the same to be transferred to the Family Court at Haveri.
2. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner and respondent had entered into a matrimonial relationship on 02.04.2012 and from within the wedlock, they have a boy child who is aged about 8 years as on date. It is submitted that the petitioner is not employed and is dependent upon her parents and that she is presently residing at Haveri and if she were to travel to attend the proceedings at the Court at Hosanagara, petitioner has to travel about 150 Kms. It is further submitted that travelling on every date of hearing would also lead to interference with the educational interest of the son.
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC:7961 CP No.433 of 2022
3. Taking note of the submission of inconvenience involved in travelling 150 Kms. from Haveri to Hosanagara and that the petitioner has a child aged about 8 years, the assertion that travelling to attend the proceedings would interfere with the educational interest of the child, requires acceptance.
4. This Court in the case Smt.M.V.Rekha v. Sri Sathya @ Suraj - ILR 2010 KAR 5407 has held as hereunder:
"The cardinal principle for exercise of power under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure is that ends of justice demand the transfer of the suit, appeal or other proceeding. In matrimonial matters, wherever Courts are called upon to consider the plea of transfer, the Courts have to take into consideration the economic soundness of either of the parties, the social strata of the spouses and behavioural pattern, their standard of life antecedent to marriage and subsequent thereon and the circumstances of either of the parties in eking out their livelihood and under whose protective umbrella they are seeking their sustenance to life. Generally, it is the wife's -4- NC: 2024:KHC:7961 CP No.433 of 2022 convenience which must be looked at while considering transfer. Further, when two proceedings in different Courts which raise common question of fact and law and when the decisions are interdependent, it is desirable that they should be tried together by the same Judge so as to avoid multiplicity in trial of the same issues and conflict of decisions (See Smt.NandaKishori v. S.B.Shiua Prakash AIR 1993 Kar 87, Sumita Singh v. Kumar Sanjay and Anr. MANU/SC/0936/2001:AIR 2002 SC 396 and Smt.Swarna Gouri v. Sri Vinayak Pujar MANU/KA/7130/2007 : ILR 2007 Kar 4561."
(emphasis supplied)
5. Taking note of the inconvenience as made out by the petitioner and the law laid down in the case of Smt.M.V.Rekha (supra), which provides that convenience of the wife is an aspect that is to be taken note of while considering the transfer petitions, petition deserves to be allowed.
6. Accordingly, petition is allowed. Proceedings in M.C.No. 35/2022 pending on the file of the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Hosanagara, is withdrawn and the same -5- NC: 2024:KHC:7961 CP No.433 of 2022 is transferred to the Family Court at Haveri. The records relating to M.C.No. 35/2022 to be transmitted forthwith to the Family Court at Haveri.
Sd/-
JUDGE VP