Gujarat High Court
Varisha Varun Shah vs Varun Jitendrakumar Shah S/O ... on 18 January, 2022
Bench: Ashokkumar C. Joshi
C/MCA/197/2021 ORDER DATED: 18/01/2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 197 of 2021
==========================================================
VARISHA VARUN SHAH
Versus
VARUN JITENDRAKUMAR SHAH S/O JITENDRAKUMAR SHAH
==========================================================
Appearance:
KEVAL H BHATT(8412) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR DIPEN DESAI(2481) for the Opponent(s) No. 1
MR PRANAV S TRIVEDI(5375) for the Opponent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE ASHOKKUMAR C. JOSHI
Date : 18/01/2022
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard learned Advocate Mr. Keval H. Bhatt for the Applicant - Wife and
learned Advocate Mr. Dipen Desai for the Opponent - Husband through video
conference.
2. The Applicant - Wife (Original Opponent) has filed this
Miscellaneous Civil Application under Section 24 of the Code of Civil
Procedure, 1908 for transferring the Family Suit No. 20 of 2021 pending
with the Family Court at Gandhinagar to the Family Court at
Ahmedabad on the grounds mentioned in the Application.
3. The facts in nutshell are that the Applicant is a legally wedded
wife of the present opponent. The marriage between the parties took
place on 22.1.2013. It is stated in the memo of application that since
the inception of marriage, the applicant was subjected to physical and
mental atrocity at the hands of the opponent and her family members.
The Applicant has filed Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 1156 of
2020 under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for getting
C/MCA/197/2021 ORDER DATED: 18/01/2022
maintenance of herself and a minor daughter before the learned Family
Court at Ahmedabad. That the Applicant is living with the aged parents,
younger brother and a minor daughter Prisha. The Applicant is living a
miserable life and is now without any sufficient means to survive
because the Opponent has deserted the Applicant without providing any
sufficient means to survive and the Applicant is now constrained to live
a miserable life since last three years. The Applicant has therefore
approached this Hon'ble Court by way of filing this Application for
transfer of Family Suit No. 20 of 2021 pending before the learned
Principal Judge, Family Court at Gandhinagar to the learned Family
Court at Ahmedabad on the grounds mentioned in the memo of
Application.
4. Learned Advocate for the Applicant has heavily placed reliance
upon the judgments passed by the coordinate bench as under:
(i) AIR 2002 SC 396 - Sumita Singh v. Kumar Sanjay and anr.
(ii) Miscellaneous Civil Application No. 1245 of 2018 decided on
7.1.2019
(iii) Miscellaneous Civil Application No. 3061 of 2010 decided on
9.2.2011
(iv) Miscellaneous Civil Application No. 95 of 2008 decided on
18.7.2008
(v) Miscellaneous Civil Application No. 205 of 2015 decided on
9.3.2016
(vi) Miscellaneous Civil Application No. 2751 of 2013 decided on
5.2.2014
5. Learned Advocate for the Applicant - Wife has vehemently and
fervently argued that in the present case the Applicant - Wife is facing
hardships to attend the court at Gandhinagar from Ahmedabad and
C/MCA/197/2021 ORDER DATED: 18/01/2022
therefore the present Application is required to be transferred from
Gandhinagar to Ahmedabad. Learned Advocate has further submitted
that though the distance between Gandhinagar and Ahmedabad is 40
Kmts. but there is nobody to accompany the Applicant to travel from
Ahmedabad to Gandhinagar. Moreover, the mother and father of the
Applicant are not only aged but also have severe medical conditions
and hence they cannot travel with the Applicant and her minor daughter.
He has further submitted that the Applicant herself is diagnosed with
deficiency in the body and often suffers fatigue and drowsiness. The
minor daughter of the Applicant was also diagnosed with the Covid
recently. He has placed reliance on the judgment passed by the
Coordinate Bench [Coram: Mrs. Justice Bela M. Trivedi,J (at present
Hon'ble Judge, Supreme Court of India)] where the Court has allowed
the Application on the ground of distance from Bharuch to Baroda.
6. Per contra, learned Advocate Mr. Dipen Desai for the
Respondent - Husband has heavily opposed this Application and stated
that the distance between Ahmedabad and Gandhinagar is not much.
Learned Advocate for the Applicant has submitted that as such there
are no comparative hardships to the Applicant. He fairly submitted that
the Respondent is ready to pay traveling allowances to the Applicant for
her to and fro journey.
7. Having heard the arguments advanced by the learned Advocates
for both the sides, prima facie it appears that the distance between
Ahmedabad and Gandhinagar is not much and when the Respondent -
Husband is ready to pay the traveling allowance to the Applicant - Wife,
the present Application deserves to be dismissed. Therefore, prima
facie, it appears that there is some substance in the arguments
advanced by learned Advocate for the Opponent - Husband. Further,
learned Advocate for the Opponent - Husband categorically buttress his
C/MCA/197/2021 ORDER DATED: 18/01/2022
arguments that the reliance placed on citations by the learned Advocate
for the Applicant - Wife are not applicable in the facts and
circumstances of the present case.
8. As discussed above, the facts in the case on hand are different.
In the present case the distance between Ahmedabad and Gandhinagar
is 40 kmts. and to and fro journey would not be more than 80 kmts.
Therefore, in the opinion of this Court, so far as the comparative
hardship is concerned, the Applicant wife has no such hardship and
therefore the authority cited by the learned Advocate for the Applicant is
not helpful to the Applicant wife in the case on hand.
9. Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the
case, this court is of the view that since the Applicant wife is not having
any hardship, the Application deserves no merit.
10. In Miscellaneous Civil Application No. 21 of 2019 in case of
Rutva Jitendra Patel v. Jay Dilipkumar Patel decided on 14.10.2019,
wherein distance between Ahmedabad to Vadodara is discussed as
100 kmts and this court has referred to Anindita Das's case (supra)
and disallowed the said Application filed by the Applicant - wife.
However, the Opponent - Husband therein was directed to pay of
Rs.1000/- for to and fro expenses, including ancillary expense to the
Applicant wife therein as and when attends the proceedings at
Vadodara. Therefore, it appears that the order of expenses is required
to be passed in the present case.
11. In view of the discussion made herein above, in fleri the
Application deserves to be dismissed and accordingly stands
dismissed. However, The Opponent - Husband shall pay Rs.1000/-
(Rupees One Thousand) to and fro expenses, including ancillary
C/MCA/197/2021 ORDER DATED: 18/01/2022
expense, to the Applicant - wife as and when she attends the
proceedings at Family Court at Gandhinagar from the date of this order.
12. Notice is discharged. Interim relief granted earlier shall stand
vacated.
(A. C. JOSHI,J)
for orders / J.N.W
