Bombay High Court
Devang Shah vs Sheetal Shah And Another on 23 February, 2021
Bench: Nitin W. Sambre
49.96884.20_MCAST.doc
ISM
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION (ST) NO. 96884 OF 2020
Devang Shah ....Applicant
V/s.
Sheetal Shah and another .....Respondents
Ms. Disha Shetty for the Applicant
Ms. Sonu N. Randive i/b Ms. Swapna Kode for Respondent no. 2 in
MCA
Ms. Sheetal Shah Respondent in person present
CORAM : NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.
DATE: FEBRUARY 23, 2021.
P.C.:
1] Misc. Civil Application taken out by the husband under Section
24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 seeking transfer of DV
proceedings being DV/150/2018 pending on the file of 63 rd
Metropolitan Magistrate at Andheri to family court Bandra, Mumbai
where proceedings being A-1136 of 2020 for divorce and other
reliefs is pending adjudication. Learned counsel for the Applicant
49.96884.20_MCAST.doc
informs that the proceedings A-18 of 2019, initiated by non-
Applicant wife, are dismissed on 10th December 2020 and as such
no relief in regard to the transfer of the same is pressed.
2] Learned counsel for the Applicant while inviting attention of
this Court to the DV proceedings and also family court proceedings
would urge that if both these proceedings are tried before family
court at Bandra, no prejudice will be caused to the non-Applicant
wife as she is the resident of Bombay and even otherwise she is
attending proceedings in the family court i.e. A-1136 of 2020.
Learned counsel would urge that transfer of the proceedings is also
in the interest of non-Applicant wife particularly when non-
Applicant will also be required to attend the proceedings and there
can be common recording of evidence so as to avoid multiplicity
and contrary findings on the similar issues.
3] Ms. Sheetal Shah non-Applicant wife appearing in person
would invite attention of this court to two praecipes placed on
record during the course of the hearing and to the order of the
Apex Court in the matter of Contempt Petition No. 504 of 2020 in
49.96884.20_MCAST.doc
Writ Petition No. 175 off 2020. According to her, Apex Court in
categorical terms has directed the Chief Justice of the Bombay High
court to hear the matter himself. In the light of said observations,
this court should not hear present proceedings but should order
placing of matter before the Honourable the Chief Justice of the
Bombay High court. She would also invite attention of this Court to
a complaint preferred by her to the Home Miniser, State of
Maharashtra thereby seeking police enquiry in the matter of
generation of fake orders of Bombay High Court and other Court
proceedings to a particular particular police officer.
4] Further contentions are, Respondent and the counsel are
conducting themselves in a fraudulent manner and trying to
hoodwink the court and judiciary. According to her proceedings A-
1136 of 2020 are fraudulently initiated. Further claim is, no case for
transfer as is prayed in the Application under Section 24 of CPC is
made out as the proceedings can be independently tried. She
would also inform the court that she has initiated divorce
proceedings before the family court at Bandra. Bald, baselss
allegations of generating fake orders, seal of the court etc are also
49.96884.20_MCAST.doc
made against the ministerial staff of High Court, Family Court also
Court of Magistrate.
5] Learned counsel for Respondent no. 2 i.e. aged mother of the
Applicant supported the prayer for transfer.
6] Considered rival submissions.
7] Apart from above, it is required to be noted that DV
proceedings of which transfer is sought from file of Magistrate's
court are at the stage of hearing of grant of interim maintenance
and an Application preferred by the Applicant husband for
dismissal of the said DV proceedings is pending consideration.
8] As far as the proceedings for divorce before the Family Court
is concern, same are at the stage of recording of evidence.
9] Learned counsel for the Applicant has placed reliance on the
49.96884.20_MCAST.doc
judgment of this court in the matter of MCA (ST) No. 5825/2020 Mr.
Sanket Sanjeev Khanolkar Vs. Mrs. Surabhi Sanket Khanolkar
delivered on 15th February 2021 so as to substantiate her
contention for transfer. She would also rely upon provisions of
Section 26 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act
so as to buttress her arguments.
10] This Court in the aforesaid matter has already taken a view
based on earlier 3 views expressed by Bombay High Court thereby
ordering transfer of the proceedings from the court of metropolitan
magistrate to the family court so as to try the proceedings together.
11] As far as the case in hand is concerned, it is noticed that
parties to the both proceedings are same. Nature of pleadings are
also almost same. So as to avoid conflicting findings on same
issues, both proceedings can be transferred, as prayed, to the
Family Court at Bandra to be tried together.
12] In that view of the matter and having regard to the view
49.96884.20_MCAST.doc
expressed by this court in the Judgment delivered in MCA (ST) No.
5825/2020, in my opinion Application needs to be allowed. As such
Application is allowed thereby ordering the transfer of DV
proceedings being DV/150/2018 pending on the file of 63 rd
Metropolitan Magistrate at Andheri to 5 th Family Court at Bandra to
be tried with divorce proceedings being A-1136 of 2020.
13] Application stands allowed in the above terms.
[NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.]
