Umaba@Urmilaba Kuldeepsingh ... vs Kuldipsinh Mangalsinh Jadeja
2023 Latest Caselaw 7022 Guj

                                                                                 NEUTRAL CITATION




       C/MCA/708/2023                            ORDER DATED: 22/09/2023

                                                                                  undefined




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                 R/MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 708 of 2023
==========================================================
     UMABA@URMILABA KULDEEPSINGH JADEJA D/O SHIVUBHA ZALA
                            Versus
                KULDIPSINH MANGALSINH JADEJA
==========================================================
Appearance:
DIPSIKHA P MISHRA(10116) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR CHANDANSINGH R RAJPUT(11030) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR ANKIT Y BACHANI(5424) for the Opponent(s) No. 1
==========================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI

                             Date : 22/09/2023

                               ORAL ORDER

1. In this petition filed under section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, the petitioner has prayed to transfer HMP No.03 of 2022 pending before the learned Principal Civil Judge, Gandhidham to learned Court, Morbi inter alia on the ground of convenience.

2. Facts of the case are as under :-

2.1. The applicant got married to respondent on 10.12.2010. Out of said wedlock female child is born who is 9 years old. Thereafter, the petitioner was subjected to physical and mental torture by the respondent and thereafter, she was driven out of her matrimonial house.

3. In background of above facts, the respondent has filed HMP No.3 of 2022 under section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for restitution of conjugal rights before the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Gandhidham.

                                                                                  NEUTRAL CITATION




     C/MCA/708/2023                              ORDER DATED: 22/09/2023

                                                                                  undefined

4. In view of above, the petitioner has approached this Court under section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking relief to transfer HMP No.3 of 2022 from learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Gandhidham to learned Court, Morbi inter-alia on the ground that she is facing difficulty to attend proceedings at Gandhidham as she has to travel 132 kms. from Morbi to Gandhidham.

5. Heard learned advocate for the petitioner.

6. Pressing into service judgment in the case of Tejalben v/s. Mihirbhai Bharatbhai Kothari [AIR 2016 SC 718], it is sought to be submitted by learned advocate for the petitioner that the petitioner is lady living in Morbi with her minor child along her parents at parental home. It is also submitted that all other proceedings arising out of dispute between the parties are pending at different Courts at Morbi but HMP is pending at Gandhidham. Vapi.

7. Learned advocate for the petitioner would submit that Morbi is 132 kms apart from Gandhidham. On every date, the petitioner has to come from Morbi to Gandhidham, which is quite inconvenience for the petitioner to attend the proceedings every time. Therefore, he would submit that the petitioner is urging to transfer HMP case only on the ground of inconvenience she is facing. Learned advocate for the petitioner would further submit that in case HMP is transferred from Gandhidham to Morbi, the petitioner shall not seek expenses for transportation she had borne for attending the proceedings. Upon such submissions, he requested to allow the petition.

                                                                                           NEUTRAL CITATION




         C/MCA/708/2023                                   ORDER DATED: 22/09/2023

                                                                                           undefined

8. In the case of Sumita Singh v/s. Kumar Sanjay [AIR 2002 SC 396], the Apex Court has observed that wife's inconveniency must be given due importance while deciding transfer petition. It is to be noted that power under section 24 of the CPC is discretionary power. The Court may or may not exercise discretion. However, when such discretion is to be exercised it must be guided by settled principle of law. To be noted that the petitioner has sought relief only on the ground of inconvenience. Fairness of judicial proceedings is not questioned. No allegations of bias in the proceedings is levelled against Judicial Officers. Thus convenience as stated earlier must be considered more particularly in background of the fact that travelling from Morbi to Gandhidham is quite difficult as both cities apart 132 kms. It is difficult for the lady to attend proceedings along with her minor child at Gandhidham. Thus, inconvenience which is pinpointed in the petition can be visualized and could be given importance as well.

9. In view of above peculiar facts and circumstances and for the foregoing reasons, this petition deserves consideration. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. HMP No.3 of 2022 pending at learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Gandhidham is hereby transferred to learned Court, Morbi for disposal in accordance with law. Direct service is permitted.

(J. C. DOSHI,J) SATISH