Bombay High Court
Meenal W/O Kaustubh Gamre (Before ... vs Mr. Kaustubh Kiran Gamre on 7 October, 2025
2025:BHC-NAG:10354
1 29mca448.25.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR
MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION [TR] NO.448 OF 2025
[Meenal w/o Kaustubh Gamre .vs. Mr. Kaustubh Kiran Gamre]
------------------------------------------------------
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders
appearances, Court's orders of directions
and Registrar's orders
------------------------------------------------------
Shri N.L. Jaiswal, Advocate a/w Shri M.P. Dhavan, Advocate for Applicant.
.................
CORAM : PRAVIN S. PATIL, J.
DATED : 07.10.2025.
1. By this application, the applicant is seeking the
transfer of Petition No.A/777/2025 pending before the
Judge-2, Family Court at Bandra, Mumbai to Family Court
at Nagpur.
2. This court had issued notice to the non-applicant
by order dated 18.7.2025, but by regular mode of service,
same was not effected till 22.9.2025. Therefore, by order
dated 22.9.2025, the permission was granted to the
applicant to serve the non-applicant by private mode of
service and place the affidavit of service on record.
Accordingly, the applicant has placed on record the affidavit
of service dated 5.10.2025, whereby it is stated by the
applicant that the service was effected on non-applicant.
3. In the meantime, by regular mode of service, the
non-applicant was served. This court thereafter adjourned
the matter to grant opportunity to the non-applicant to
2 29mca448.25.odt
appear in this application, but till date, no one has put
appearance on behalf of non-applicant.
4. Today also in the morning session, none appeared
for the non-applicant. Hence, I proceed to decide the
present application on its own merits.
5. It is the submission of the present applicant that
after arising of matrimonial dispute between the applicant
and non-applicant, she has started residing with her
parents at Nagpur. She has filed Criminal Misc. Application
No.613/2025 under Section 12 of the Protection of Women
From Domestic Violence Act and Petition No.A/44/2025 for
divorce against the non-applicant. Both the proceedings
are pending on the file of respective court at Nagpur.
6. It is pointed out by the applicant that the non-
applicant has also filed the proceeding for divorce before
the Family Court at Bandra, Mumbai bearing Petition No.A-
777/2025.
7. The submission of the applicant is that the
distance between the Mumbai and Nagpur is near about
700 km and she is unable to attend the proceeding at
Mumbai. It is further stated that she is not having any
independent earning source and, therefore, it will be
difficult for her to attend the proceeding at Mumbai.
3 29mca448.25.odt
8. It will be relevant to consider the law laid down
by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of N.C.V.
Aishwarya .vs. A.S. Saravana Karthik Sha, reported in
2022 SCC OnLine SC 1199, wherein it is 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.
9. According to this judgment of Hon'ble Supreme
Court of India, when the decision in the cases are
interdependent, it is desirable that they should be tried
together to avoid multiplicity in trial of the same issues and
conflict of decision. Here admittedly the applicant as well
as non-applicant filed the proceeding of divorce one at
4 29mca448.25.odt
Nagpur and one at Bandra (Mumbai). Therefore, it will be
expedient that both the matters should be tried by one
court to avoid the complicity in the matter.
10. In addition to above, applicant has already filed
the proceeding at Nagpur for divorce and one another
proceeding under Section 12 of the Protection of Women
from Domestic Violence Act before the JMFC at Nagpur. In
view of this factual position, I am of the opinion that the
proceeding filed by the non-applicant at Bandra (Mumbai)
deserves to be transferred at Nagpur.
11. It is further pertinent to note that the applicant
has made specific averment in her application and
demonstrates as to how it will not be convenient for her to
attend the proceeding at Bandra (Mumbai). All these
averments are not controverted in the matter.
12. Hence, for the aforesaid reasons, I proceed to pass
the following order :
ORDER
(1) The application is allowed.
(2) The proceeding bearing Petition No.A-
777/2025 pending before the Judge-2, Family Court
Bandra (Mumbai) be transferred to the Family Court at
Nagpur.
(3) The Judge-2, Family Court, Mumbai at
Bandra is directed to transfer the record and proceedings of
Petition No.A-777/2025 to the Family Court at Nagpur.
5 29mca448.25.odt
(4) The Family Court at Nagpur is further
directed to decide the Petition No.A-44/2025 filed by the
applicant and Petition No.A-777/2025 filed by the non-
applicant together and decide it accordingly.
(5) There shall be no order as to costs.
(PRAVIN S. PATIL, J.)
Gulande
Signed by: A.S. GULANDE
Designation: PS To Honourable Judge
Date: 07/10/2025 19:39:09
