[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
Bombay High Court
Sau. Bhagyashri W/O Anand Kidile vs Anand S/O Prakash Kidile on 15 December, 2025
2025:BHC-NAG:14233
mca 613-2025.doc 1/6
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION (TR.) NO.613/2025
Sau. Bhagyashri w/o Anand Kidile
aged about-30 years
Occupation-Household,
R/o C/o Chandrakant Nandane,
Mahananda Nagar, Umarsara
Tq. & Dist.Yavatmal
... APPLICANT
...VERSUS...
Anand s/o Prakash Kidile,
aged about 35 years,
Occupation-Business,
R/o Infront of closed gate of
Model Mill "Suprashans", Bhavan
Karnal Bagh, Nagpur
Tq.& Dist.Nagpur
...NON-APPLICANT
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri S.S. Bhalerao, Advocate for applicant
None for non-applicant
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : PRAVIN S. PATIL, J.
DATED : 15.12.2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
. Heard.
2. By this application, the applicant is seeking transfer to
the proceedings bearing petition No.A-1113/2024 from Family
Court No.5, Nagpur to Family Court, Yavatmal.
3. In the present matter, this Court on 11.09.2025 issued
notices to the non-applicant. At that time, permission was also
granted to the applicant to serve the non-applicant by private mode
of service in addition to the regular mode of service. According to
the applicant, he has served the non-applicant by private mode. The
office note shows that non-applicant was also served on regular
mode of service. Thereafter, this matter was listed on 21.11.2025,
but, no one appeared on behalf of non-applicant. However, to grant
him one more opportunity of hearing, this matter was adjourned for
three weeks, so that he can avail the opportunity in the present
matter. But, today again, none appeared for the non-applicant in
the matter. Hence, I proceed to decide the present application on its
own merits.
4. The submission of the applicant-wife is that she is
having six years old school going daughter is residing with her. She
is taking all care of the daughter. The applicant, who is not having
any earning source, has filed the proceedings under Section 125 of
Criminal Procedure Code for grant of maintenance. In the said
proceedings, the learned Court has awarded monthly maintenance
of Rs.7000/- to the wife and Rs.5000/- to the child. But, non-
applicant did not comply the said order. As such, applicant is facing
serious financial problems. Accordingly, she has filed proceedings
for recovery of the maintenance amount.
5. It is brought to my notice that non-applicant appeared
before the Family Court, Yavatmal and moved the application for
alteration of the maintenance amount. As such, according to the
applicant, non-applicant is already attending one of the proceedings
at Yavatmal.
6. It is stated by the applicant that if the proceedings filed
by the non-applicant and transferred to the Yavatmal, it will be
convenient for her to attend the proceedings at Yavatmal. Further
non-applicant is avoiding to pay the regular maintenance to her, so
she finds it difficult to attend the proceedings from Yavatmal to
Nagpur. All the averments made by the applicant remain
uncontroverted due to absence of non-applicant in the matter.
7. As per the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in the case of N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs. A.S. Saravana Karthik
Sha in Civil Appeal No. 4894 of 2022 (Arising out of SLP (C) No.
16465 of 2021), the Hon'ble Supreme Court has specifically
observed in para 9 and 10 as under:
"9. The cardinal principle for exercise of power Under
Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure is that the
ends of justice should 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 both the parties, the social strata
of the spouses and their behavioural pattern, their
standard of life prior to the marriage and subsequent
thereto and the circumstances of both the parties in
eking out their livelihood and under whose protective
umbrella they are seeking their sustenance to life. Given
the prevailing socio-economic paradigm in the Indian
society, generally, it is the wife's convenience which
must be looked at while considering transfer.
10. Further, when two or more proceedings are
pending in different Courts between the same parties
which raise common question of fact and law, and when
the decisions in the cases 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."
8. The Supreme Court has held that in such cases, one of
the aspects of behaviour pattern is also required to be considered
while deciding the proceedings under Section 24 of the Civil
Procedure Code. The applicant has pointed out the behaviour
pattern of the non-applicant in the matter and I am satisfied that
non-applicant is not following the orders of the Court and not
paying regular maintenance amount for which applicant wife is
entitled.
9. Hence, for the aforesaid reasons, I am of the opinion
that applicant has made out the case for transfer. Hence, I proceed
to pass the following order:
ORDER
i) The application is allowed.
ii) The petition No.A-1113/2024 is hereby transferred from
Family Court No.5, Nagpur to Family Court Yavatmal.
iii) The Family Court No.5, Nagpur is directed to transfer the
record and proceedings of the petition No.A-1113/2024 to the
Family Court, Yavatmal.
iv) Family Court, Yavatmal is requested to decide the
maintenance as well as the proceedings filed by the non-applicant
together or by giving the common date so that it will be convenient
for non-applicant to attend both the proceedings at Yavatmal.
10. The application stands disposed of in above terms.
(PRAVIN S. PATIL, J.)
R.S. Sahare
Signed by: Mrs. Ranjana Sahare
Designation: PA To Honourable Judge
Date: 15/12/2025 20:07:37
