Sow. Suchita Dilip Badgire vs Shri Dilip Dhananjay Badgire And ...
2016 Latest Caselaw 5616 Bom

                                             1                      MCA-9.16.doc


                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,




                                                                             
                           BENCH AT AURANGABAD

              MISCELLANEOUS CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9 OF 2016




                                                     
              Sow. Suchita w/o Dilip Badgire
              Age: 30 years, occup. household,




                                                    
              R/o Hudco, N-2, T.V. Center,
              Aurangabad                                      .. Petitioner

                      versus




                                        
     1.       Shri Dilip s/o Dhananjay Badgire,
              Age: 33 years, occup. Agriculture
                             
              and Business, r/o Sonvati, Tq. &
              Dist. Latur.
                            
     2.       The State of Maharashtra                        .. Respondents

                    ---------
              Mrs. Dipali Jape Ansingkar, Advocate for petitioner
              Mr. C. S. Kulkarni, Advocate for respondent no. 1
      
   



                                   CORAM :       SUNIL P. DESHMUKH, J.

                                   DATE :        27th September, 2016


     ORAL JUDGMENT:





     1.       Rule.     Rule made returnable forthwith.     Heard the learned

counsel for the parties finally, by consent.

2. This miscellaneous civil application by wife has been filed

seeking transfer of the proceedings pending before the civil judge,

senior division, Latur, initiated by by respondent-husband bearing

hindu marriage petition no. 05/2015 to the family court at

Aurangabad.

2 MCA-9.16.doc

3. After hearing learned counsel, it transpires that a couple of

proceedings have been initiated at the instance of present applicant

at Aurangabad. In the circumstances, it is obvious that respondent

in any case will have to be at Aurangabad for attending said

proceedings albeit it is being contended that respondent is not

responding to the notices.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that since the two

proceedings are pending in the court at Aurangabad, it would be in

fitness of things that the hindu marriage petition pending in the

court at Latur, is transferred to the court at Aurangabad.

5. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that there have

been attempts for cohabitation between the parties but those have

not produced desired result and as such purports to resist on that

count the request being made under the present application.

6. In the circumstances, I deem it appropriate to grant the

request made under the miscellaneous civil application.

7. At this point, learned counsel Mr. Kulkarni for respondent

requests that the dates in the proceedings pending in the court at

Aurangabad may be arranged so as to be convenient to the

respondent to attend the same and further requests for expeditious

disposal of the proceedings.

3 MCA-9.16.doc

8. In the circumstances, miscellaneous civil application is

allowed in terms of prayer clause (A) . Proceedings bearing hindu

marriage petition no. 95/2015 pending before Civil Judge, Senior

Division, Latur, stand transferred to the Family Court, Aurangabad.

The dates in the proceedings at Aurangabad as far as possible be

reasonably arranged in order to make those convenient for

attendance by respondent. The proceedings be disposed of

expeditiously, preferably within a period of twelve months from the

date of receipt of writ of this order.

9. Rule made absolute in aforesaid terms. Miscellaneous civil

application stands disposed of.

SUNIL P. DESHMUKH, JUDGE

pnd