Ekta Gopalbhai Bhavsar vs Manishkumar Babubhai Mistry
2021 Latest Caselaw 477 Guj

        C/MCA/564/2019                               JUDGMENT




      IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

        R/MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 564 of 2019

FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE ASHOKKUMAR C. JOSHI
=======================================

     Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed
 1                                                                NO
     to see the judgment ?

 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ?                        NO

     Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy
 3                                                                NO
     of the judgment ?
   Whether this case involves a substantial question
 4 of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution            NO
   of India or any order made thereunder ?

=======================================
                  EKTA GOPALBHAI BHAVSAR
                             Versus
               MANISHKUMAR BABUBHAI MISTRY
=======================================
Appearance:
Ms. HIMANI KINI(7489) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
VINAY D BAIRAGAR(8360) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
RULE SERVED BY DS(65) for the Opponent(s) No. 1
=======================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE ASHOKKUMAR C. JOSHI

                         Date : 13/01/2021

                         ORAL JUDGMENT

1. Present application is filed by the applicant - wife under section 24 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) seeking transfer of Hindu Marriage Petition No. 22 of 2019 (HMP), filed by the respondent herein - husband for divorce under the provisions of section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 before the Family

C/MCA/564/2019 JUDGMENT

Court at Bharuch, to the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate at Vadodara.

2. Pursuant to the rule issued by this Court, as far as back on 17.09.2019, nobody appears for the respondent - husband. The matter is of 2019. While, admitting the matter, interim relief staying the proceedings of the HMP in question came to be granted by this Court, which is operative. That, thereafter, the matter was adjourned from time to time, but the respondent has put in no appearance, either in person or through an advocate to represent his case. Accordingly, this matter is heard finally today.

3. Facts in nutshell of the present case are that, marriage of the present applicant and the respondent was solemnized on 21.01.2016 as per the Hindu rites and rituals. That, out of the said wedlock they have one child. That, after the marriage, for some time, their marriage life went on good, but then, allegedly, the respondent, started giving physical and mental torture to the present applicant, which, eventually, led to the irreparable break down of the marriage and therefore, the respondent herein filed a Hindu Marriage Petition No. 22 of 2019 before the Family Court at Bharuch.

4. Heard learned advocate Mr. Vinay D. Bairagar for the applicant through video conference.

4.1 The learned advocate for the applicant - wife has vehemently submitted that the respondent - husband has filed the HMP in question before the Family Court at Bharuch, whereas applicant is a permanent resident of Vadodara. Further, the applicant has a minor child and hence, it is very difficult for her to

C/MCA/564/2019 JUDGMENT

attend the Court proceedings at Bharuch, which is at a quite distance from Vadodara. Further, the applicant has filed an application under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) before the concerned Court at Vadodara only, which is pending. Furthermore, the respondent is financially sound and living a lavish life, whereas, the applicant has responsibility of her child also and in the circumstances, it is urged that it would be quite easier for the respondent to attend the proceedings at Vadodara than the present applicant, who resides at Vadodara and has to go to Bharuch for attending the Court proceedings with her minor child. Therefore, it is prayed that the HMP in question may be transferred from Family Court, Bharuch to the Court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate at Vadodara.

5. Regard being had to the submissions advanced by the learned advocate for the applicant and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that the present applicant has filed this application under section 24 of the CPC for transfer of aforesaid HMP from the Family Court, Bharuch to the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate at Vadodara. Exercise of discretion under section 24 of the CPC is commonplace but for the fact that the ground for the same is genuine and convincing. Adverting to the facts of the present case, the present applicant has sought transfer of a case from the Court at Bharuch to the Court at Vadodara. If the distance between the two places is taken into consideration, it is not so long and therefore, the applicant can travel to Bharuch for attending the Court proceedings hassle-free and without any hardship and only on this ground, this application merits no consideration. Further, undisputedly the applicant has already filed the maintenance application before the concerned Court at Vadodara and hence, at this juncture, the Court deems it proper not to go into paying

C/MCA/564/2019 JUDGMENT

expenses for travelling by the respondent. Further, the applicant can very well recourse to the remedy available to her under the law for grievance, if any, before the Court which is seized with the matter.

6. In the backdrop as aforesaid, present application fails and is rejected accordingly. Rule is discharged. No order as to costs. Interim relief granted earlier shall stand vacated forthwith.

[ Dr. Ashokkumar C. Joshi, J. ] hiren