Allahabad High Court
Ragini Pathak vs Anand Kumar Pandey on 25 August, 2025
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:147734
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
TRANSFER APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 962 of 2024
Ragini Pathak
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
Anand Kumar Pandey
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)
:
Prem Chand Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)
:
Court No. - 37
HON'BLE CHANDRA KUMAR RAI, J.
1. Heard Mr. Prem Chand Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant.
2. As per office report dated 21.02.2025, notice was issued to the opposite party but no one appeared on behalf of the opposite party as such service is deemed sufficient upon the opposite party.3. Brief facts of the case are that applicant is wife and opposite party is husband. A petition under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 filed on behalf of the opposite party/husband is pending in the Family Court, Prayagraj.
4. The instant transfer application has been filed with the prayer to transfer the Case No.621 of 2024 (Anand Kumar Pandey Vs. Ragini Pathak) under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 from the court of Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Prayagraj to Family Court District-Sant Ravidas Nagar (Bhadohi).
5. This Court entertained the matter on 13.12.2024 and stayed the further proceeding of the Case. The order dated 13.12.2024 is quoted as under:
"Heard learned counsel for the applicant and perused the record.
This transfer application has been filed by the applicant seeking transfer of Case No. 621 of 2024 (Anand Kumar Pandey Vs. Ragini Pathak) under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act from the court of Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Allahabad to the competent court of District- Sant Ravidas Nagar (Bhadohi).
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that it is a matrimonial dispute between the parties. It is further submitted that the applicant is semi-literal and she is unemployed. It is further submitted that the opposite party is not taking care of the applicant and now applicant is residing at her parental house.
Matter requires consideration.
Issue notice to the respondent.
Steps be taken within two weeks by registered post/speed post.
Counsel for the respondents may file counter affidavit within four weeks from today. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, may be filed within two weeks, thereafter.
List on the date fixed in the notice, as fresh.
Till the next date of listing, further proceedings of Case No. 621 of 2024 (Anand Kumar Pandey Vs. Ragini Pathak) under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act pending in the court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Allahabad shall remain stayed.
It is made clear that in the event, the steps regarding issuing notice to the respondent are not taken by the counsel for the applicant within one week, the interim order shall stand automatically vacated."
6. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that proceeding of Case No.621 of 2024 (Anand Kumar Pandey Vs. Ragini Pathak) under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 initiated by the opposite party-husband should be transferred from the Family Court Prayagraj to the competent court at Sant Ravidas Nagar (Bhadohi). He further placed reliance upon paragraph Nos. 17, 18 and 19 of the affidavit filed in support of instant application.
7. No counter affidavit has been filed in this matter.
8. I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
9. There is no dispute about the fact that proceeding under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 initiated by opposite party/ husband is pending at family Court, Prayagraj.
10. In order to appreciate the controversy involved in the matter perusal of paragraph Nos.17, 18 and 19 of the affidavit filed in support of instant application will be relevant which are as under:
"17. That the cause of action for filing the case for conjugal rights under section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act has accrued at family court District Sant Ravidas Nagar (Bhadohi) the family court Prayagraj is not competent court to try the said case.
18. That the applicant is living in Sant Ravidas Nagar (Bhadohi) she is unable to travel up down from Sant Ravidas Nagar (Bhadohi) to Prayagraj which distance is about hundred fifteen Km. from defend the matrimonial proceedings and she has no one with whom she can travel and also applicant is facing a criminal case at District Sant Ravidas Nagar (Bhadohi) and another case filed by opposite party at Prayagraj the said case under section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act was filed by the opposite party only a view to harass the applicant and distance between Sant Ravdas Nagar (Bhadohi) to Prayagraj is about hundred fifteen Km. from place where applicant is residing it will not be possible for the applicant being a lady to travel on each and every date.
19. That opposite party is threatening her of dire consequences if she visit Prayagraj to pursue the case filed by the opposite party, she does not have any in come to travel to pursue the case the opposite party is not giving any maintenance to the applicant."
11. Perusal of the paragraphs Nos.17, 18 and 19 of the affidavit filed in support of the instant transfer application as quoted above this Court is of the view that the prayer of the applicant/wife for transfer the case from Prayagraj to Sant Ravidas Nagar (Bhadohi) is genuine coupled with the fact that opposite party/husband has not filed any counter affidavit in this transfer application.
12. Apex Court in the Case reported in (2016) 14 Supreme Court Cases 356 (Vaishali Shridhar Jagtap Vs. Shridhar Vishwanath Jagtap) has transferred the proceeding of divorce petition filed by husband to the place where wife reside. Apex Court Judgment rendered in Vaishali Shridhar Jagtap (Supra) will be relevant for perusal, which are as under:-
"1. Leave granted.
2. The appellant is the wife of the respondent. She is aggrieved since the High Court of Bombay declined to transfer the case, filed in Mumbai by the respondent for divorce, to Barshi where the appellant resides-parental home. The Review Petition was also dismissed. The High Court has taken the view that the appellant does not have to travel on all days for defending the case, and on the days of her travel, she will be paid a sum of rupees one thousand five hundred.
3. According to the appellant, her mother is aged and it is difficult for her mother to accompany the appellant for her travel to Mumbai. It is also stated that there are three criminal cases - one for maintenance, the second under the Prevention of Domestic Violence Act, 2005 and the third under Section 498A of The Indian Penal Code, 1860 and other related provisions, pending at Barshi, and one on the civil side for restitution.
4. The learned Counsel appearing for the respondent has vehemently opposed the prayer for transfer. It was submitted that the appellant's mother is only 60 years old and that she has two brothers. It is also pointed out that majority of the witnesses are from Mumbai and it would be difficult for them to travel to Barshi, and, in any case, the attempt is to harass the respondent-husband.
5. Admittedly, the distance between Mumbai and Barshi is around 400 kilometres. Four cases between the parties are pending at Barshi. Apparently, the comparative hardship is more to the appellant-wife. This aspect of the matter, unfortunately, the High Court has missed to take note of.
6. In view of the above, the impugned orders are set aside and the M.J.Petition No. 2287 of 2013 filed by the respondent-husband in Family Court Bandra, Bombay will stand transferred to the court of competent jurisdiction at Barshi.
7. The appeals are allowed as above. There shall be no orders as to costs."
13. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, the instant transfer application is allowed. The proceeding of Case No.621 of 2024 (Anand Kumar Pandey Vs. Ragini Pathak) under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955 pending in the court of Additional Principal Judge Family Court, Prayagraj is transferred to Family Court District-Sant Ravidas Nagar (Bhadohi). The Family Court, Prayagraj is directed to transmit the record of the case to family Court Sant Ravidas Nagar (Bhadohi) forthwith. The family Court Sant Ravidas Nagar (Bhadohi) is directed to decide the aforementioned proceeding of the Case No.621 of 2024 (Anand Kumar Pandey Vs. Ragini Pathak) under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 in accordance with law expeditiously .
(Chandra Kumar Rai,J.)
August 25, 2025
PS*/Vandana
