Smt. Titli Mishra Mukherjee vs Sri Sourav Mukherjee
2023 Latest Caselaw 1177 Cal

13.2.2023

Ct. no. 652 sb C.O. 3529 of 2022

Smt. Titli Mishra Mukherjee Vs.

                              Sri Sourav Mukherjee


                   Mr. Subhro P Lahiri
                   Mr. R. Naskar              ...for the petitioner

Affidavit of service filed by the petitioner is taken

on record. In spite of service, opposite party is not

represented.

This is an application under Section 24 of the Code

of Civil Procedure seeking transfer of the Matrimonial

suit being no. 35 of 2021 pending before the court of

learned Additional District Judge, 1st Court, Jhargram to

the court of learned District Judge, Paschim Medinipore.

The petitioner contended that the petitioner was

married with the opposite party on 6.10.2012. The

parties are blessed with a female child who was born on

8th May, 2016. The petitioner alleged that during her stay

at her matrimonial house, torture of the husband and in-

laws became unbearable and for which she has initiated

a criminal proceeding which is pending before the court

of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Contai

and charge sheet has already been submitted against the

accused persons. The husband/opposite party is

contesting the said proceeding at Contai court. She

further alleged that prior to the present suit, the opposite

party instituted another suit being Matrimonial suit no.

834 of 2019 under Section 27 of the Special Marriage Act

before the learned District Judge, Paschim Medinipore

and in the said suit, the petitioner herein duly

participated and contested but subsequently the same

was dismissed for non prosecution on 23rd February,

2021. Subsequently, the opposite party/husband has

instituted present suit for dissolution of marriage in the

court at Jhargram. The petitioner submits that the court

at Jhargram situates at a distance of 180 kilometres

from the petitioner's residence and there is no direct

train from Contai to Jhargram and for which at least two

trains are required to be changed and even after that she

requires to travel more journey and at least four hours is

consumed for one way journey. Accordingly, it is very

difficult for the petitioner to attend the said proceeding at

Jhargram court. The petitioner is further apprehended

that in case of long journey, there is a serious threat of

her life and the child of being snatched away by her

husband and her in-laws and she further alleged that

there were previous such attempts which the petitioner

prevented on earlier occasions. The petitioner further

alleged that the husband/opposite party is presently

serving at Kharagpur which is well connected with

Paschim Medimipur and he will not face any

inconvenience in case of transfer and as such she has

sought for aforesaid transfer.

The petitioner in support of her contention has

relied upon the judgment of Vaishali Shridhar Jagtap

vs. Shridhar Vishwanath Jagtap and also the judgment

of Sumita Singh vs. Kumar Sanjay and Another

reported in (2001) 10 SCC 41, where it was held, it is

husband's suit against the wife and therefore

convenience of the wife must be looked at.

Having considered the facts and circumstances of

the case and that it is a suit for dissolution of marriage

initiated by the opposite party/husband and also

considering the contention of the petitioner that the

opposite party/husband is now posted at Kharagpur

which is close to Paschim Medinipore and well connected

with Paschim Medinipore and that in such cases, where

the suit has been filed by husband for dissolution of

marriage, the convenience of the petitioner is of

paramount importance and also considering the

inconveniences caused to a female in travelling to

another distant place for pursuing her matrimonial suit

through public transportation, in the socio economic

situation prevailing in country, is much more than the

inconvenience that might be caused to the opposite

party/husband, the prayer made by the petitioner is

allowed.

Learned District Judge, Jhargram is hereby

directed to withdraw the Matrimonial suit being no. 35 of

2021 pending before the court of learned Additional

District Judge, 1st Court, Jhargram and to transmit the

same to the court of learned District Judge, Paschim

Medinipore within a period of three weeks from the date

of communication of the order.

The transferee court shall serve fresh notice upon

both the parties intimating the next date of hearing

before proceeding further with the aforesaid suit and

learned transferee court will continue the proceeding at

the stage where it reached till date.

The department is directed to send a copy of the

order to the learned District Judge, Paschim Medinipore

and learned District Judge, Jhargram immediately.

Accordingly, C.O. 3529 of 2022 is disposed of.

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, duly

applied for, be given to the parties upon compliance of all

requisite formalities.

(Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee, J.)