Nikita Hiteshkumar Jadav vs Hiteshkumar Sureshbhai Jadav
2022 Latest Caselaw 935 Guj

     C/MCA/610/2021                                JUDGMENT DATED: 28/01/2022




            IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                 R/MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 610 of 2021


FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE ASHOKKUMAR C. JOSHI
==========================================================
1    Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed                    No
     to see the judgment ?

2    To be referred to the Reporter or not ?                             No

3    Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy                   No
     of the judgment ?

4    Whether this case involves a substantial question                   No
     of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution
     of India or any order made thereunder ?

==========================================================
                         NIKITA HITESHKUMAR JADAV
                                    Versus
                      HITESHKUMAR SURESHBHAI JADAV
==========================================================
Appearance:
KRUTARTH K DESAI(9662) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
NOTICE SERVED(4) for the Opponent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
    CORAM:HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE ASHOKKUMAR C. JOSHI

                              Date : 28/01/2022
                              ORAL JUDGMENT

1. Heard learned advocate Mr. Krutarth Desai for the applicant.

Though Notice is served and despite sufficient time is given to the

respondent but none is present for the respondent and therefore the

Court is proceeded with the matter.

2. Rule.

3.      The     present   application   under    Section-24     of    the      Civil







      C/MCA/610/2021                           JUDGMENT DATED: 28/01/2022

Procedure Code,1908 (for short the Code) is filed by the applicant-

wife to transfer the Family Suit No.156 of 2021 pending with the

Court of learned Family Court at Anand to the learned Family Court

at Bharuch.

4. The brief facts of the case are that the applicant -wife got

married with the respondent on 9.3.2019 at Bharuch. That, the

successful co -habitation could not last and unfortunately marital co

- habitation seized to exist and the respondent has made the

applicant to live at her paternal home at Bharuch. That, the

applicant is having soulful relationship with the present respondent

but the family members of the present respondents were used to

create hurdles in the matrimonial life of the applicant. That, the

family members of the present respondent used to put tremendous

mental stress by putting restrictions on the applicant about money.

That, the personal liberty and wishes of the applicant was never

respected by the parents of the respondent. That, the applicant has

not withdrawn herself from the society of the respondent voluntarily

but the applicant has been forced to withdrawn herself by acts and

deeds of the family members of the applicant and inaction of the

respondent.

5. Learned advocate Mr. Desai for the applicant submitted that

the applicant is a house wife and not having any source of income.

He also submitted that the father of the applicant is doing job and

looking after family. He further submitted that applicant is having no

C/MCA/610/2021 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/01/2022

child. It is further submitted that the distance between the Bharuch

to Anand is approximately 130 KM and therefore, round trip about

260 KM. He also submitted that the proceedings are pending before

the Family Court at Anand may be transferred to the learned Family

Court at Bharuch.

6. Considering submissions made by the learned advocates for

the respective parties, it appears that it would be difficult for the

applicant to travel about 260 kms from Anand to Bharuch for round

trip and the applicant is a house wife, having no source of income,

which may cause hardships for the woman to attend the Court at

Bharuch. This Court has also relied upon the decisions rendered in

the case of Minesh Rajnikant Dalal v/s. Avani Minesh Dalal,

reported in 2002 (2) GLR 1685 also referred to the decision made

in the case of Jayshreeba Jayendrasinh Raulji Vs. Jayendrasinh

ganpatsinh Raulji in MCA no. 431 of 2019. Therefore this is a

fit case to exercise discretion under section 24 of CPC for

transferring the matter from Anand to Bharuch. The application is

allowed. The proceedings of the Family Suit No.156 of 2021,

pending before the Family Court at Anand is ordered to be

transferred to the learned Family Court at Bharuch. Rule is made

absolute. No order as to costs. Direct service is permitted through E-

mail.

(A. C. JOSHI,J) prk