Priyanka Jitendra Ingale vs Jitendra Supada Ingale
2021 Latest Caselaw 2630 Bom

                                              {1}
                                                                            mca20719.odt


          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
                     BENCH AT AURANGABAD

              MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO.207 OF 2019

 Priyanka w/o Jitendra Ingale,
 age: 27 years, Occ: Household,
 presently R/o Flat No.134,
 Shrikrushna Apartment, 3rd Floor,
 Shrikrishna Nagar, Latur,
 District Latur.                                                 Petitioner

          Versus

 Jitendra Supada Ingale,
 age: 29 years, Occ: Labour,
 R/o Palashi Supo,
 Tq. Jalgaon Jamod,
 District Buldhana.                                              Respondent


 Mr.Avinash A. Phad, advocate for the Petitioner.
 Mr.M.D.Gitte, advocate for the Respondent.


                                       CORAM : V.K.JADHAV, J.

                                       DATE         : 09th February, 2021.

 JUDGMENT :

1 Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and

heard fnally by consent of learned Counsel for respective

parties.

2 This is about transfer of matrimonial proceedings

from Khamgaon, District Buldhana to Latur.

{2} mca20719.odt

3 The learned Counsel for the applicant submits that

Respondent-husband has fled a petition bearing HMP No.80 of

2019 before the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Khamgaon,

for decree of divorce. The learned Counsel submits that father of

the applicant is no more and applicant resides with her mother at

Latur. There is nobody in the family to accompany her to attend

the Court dates at Khamgaon. The distance between Khamgaon

and Latur is about 300 Kms. The applicant-wife has no

independent source of income. It is submitted that the applicant-

wife has also initiated two proceedings, one for maintenance and

another, under the provisions of Protection of Women from

Domestic Violence Act, 2005, at Latur and in those proceedings,

notice has been issued to the Respondent-husband.

3 The learned Counsel for the applicant, in order to

substantiate his contention, placed reliance on the following

citations:

(i) Vennangot Anuradha Samir Vs.

Vennangot Mohandas Samir, 2016 (1)

Bom.C.R. 250;

               (ii)     Soma     Choudhuri       Vs.        Gourab





                                             {3}
                                                                        mca20719.odt

               Choudhuri (2004) 13 SCC 462;

               (iii)    Anjali Ashok Sadhwani Vs. Ashok

Kishinchand Sadhwani, AIR 2009 SC 1374;

(iv) Vaishali Shridhar Jagtap Vs.

Shridhar Vishwanath Jagtap, 2016 AIR (SC)

3584;

(v) Sumita Singh Vs. Kumar Sanjay,

(2001) 10 SCC 41 : AIR 2002 SC 396;

(vi) Mahadevi Mehtre Vs. Gopal, 2015 (5)

AIR Bom. 250;

(vii) Mona Aresh Goel Vs. Aresh Satya

Goel, 2000 (9) SCC 255 : AIR 2000 SCW 2652;

(viii) Ravinder Kaur Vs. Hitinder Singh,

AIR 2000 SC 3403;

(ix) Rena Gautam Vs. Vinod Gautam, AIR

2000 SC 3405;

(x) Reena Mehra Vs. Rohit Rai Mehra,

AIR 2003 SC 1002;

(xi) Rakhi Banerjee Vs. Subhankar

Mukherje, AIR 2009 SC 928;

(xii) T. Gayatri Devi Vs. Tallepanent

Sreekanth, 2013 (6) Bom.C.R. 119 (SC);

(xiii) Anita Balkrishna Barge Vs.

{4} mca20719.odt

Balkrishna Sopan Barge, 2011 (3) Bom.C.R.

866 (Aurangabad Bench); and

(xiv) Smita Dhananjay Patil Vs.

Dhananjay Krishnakumar Patil, 2013 (5)

Bom.C.R. 694 (Aurangabad Bench).

4 The learned Counsel for the Respondent-husband

submits that the Respondent-husband is ready to bear travel

expenses for the applicant to visit Khamgaon for attending the

Court dates and as such, there is no reason to transfer the

proceedings from Khamgaon to Latur.

5 In the cases relied upon by the learned Counsel for

the petitioner, it is reiterated that in the matrimonial proceedings

convenience of the wife is required to be considered.

6 In the instant case, the applicant's father is no more

and she resides with her mother at Latur. The distance between

Khamgaon and Latur is approximately 300 Kms. There is nobody

in the family to accompany her to Khamgaon for attending the

Court dates by travelling such a long distance. She has no

independent source of income. The applicant-wife has also

initiated two proceedings in the Court at Latur. It is,

{5} mca20719.odt

thus, convenient for the Respondent-husband to attend all the

proceedings at Latur, including the Marriage Petition fled by him

for decree of divorce.

7 In view of the same, Misc. Civil Application is allowed

in terms of Prayer Clause "A". No order as to costs.

(V.K.JADHAV) JUDGE

adb