Smita Jaiswal @ Soni Jaiswal vs Rajnish Choudhary
2021 Latest Caselaw 2386 Jhar

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                           Transfer Petition (Civil) No. 20 of 2017
                                           ---

       Smita Jaiswal @ Soni Jaiswal                                ----- Petitioner
                                       Versus
       Rajnish Choudhary                                          -- --- Opp. Party
                                          ---

CORAM: The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh Through Video Conferencing

---

For the Petitioners : Mr. Hemant Kr. Shikarwar, Adv.

             For the Opp. Parties      : Mr. Nitish Krishna, Adv.
                                         ---

08/16.07.2021        Heard learned counsel for the petitioner Mr. Hemant Kr.

Shikarwar and learned counsel for the opposite party husband Mr. Nitish Krishna.

2. Petitioner has sought transfer of Matrimonial Title Suit No.102/2014 instituted by the opposite party husband seeking divorce under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 from the court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Ranchi to the court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Hazaribag.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was residing with her parents at Hazaribag, but during the COVID pandemic her father has also passed away. The marriage was solemnized on 8th July 2010 at Ranchi as per the Hindu rites and customs and during her stay in the matrimonial home, additional demand of dowry was made by the opposite party for purchasing a four-wheeler. On non-payment of which she was subjected to torture which led to termination of her pregnancy. She was thrown out of the matrimonial home in August 2012. The Matrimonial Suit has been filed on the allegations of cruelty and that she used to talk with her boyfriend and her parents and brother used to interfere in the matrimonial life of the parties. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has filed a maintenance case bearing no.120/2014 before the learned Family Court, Hazaribag against the opposite party and also filed a Complaint Case No.126/2014 before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hazaribag where the opposite party is to appear and contest. As such, petitioner who is without any financial support, may not be able to properly contest the proceedings of the Divorce Suit at Ranchi, if it is not transferred to Hazaribag, that too after death of her father.

4. A counter affidavit has been filed by the opposite party. Learned counsel for the opposite party submits that transfer petition has been filed after three years of filing of the Matrimonial Suit in 2014 and it was dismissed for non-compliance of the order of the Hon'ble Court. After 1 year and 8 months the restoration petition was filed and finally vide order dated 26th February 2021 the transfer petition was restored. It is submitted that the opposite party has been diligently prosecuting his case and has produced all the witnesses before the Court. Petitioner/respondent in the Matrimonial Suit has also produced two witnesses before the Court who have been examined and only the petitioner wife has to examine herself before the learned Family Court. The case is ripe for final arguments and judgment and as such it would cause great prejudice if the Suit is transferred after 7 years when it is at the verge of final disposal. Therefore, no prima-facie case or balance of convenience is made out to seek an order in favour of the petitioner.

5. I have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and taken note of the relevant materials on record.

6. It appears that the Matrimonial Title Suit bearing no.102/2014 preferred by the opposite party husband has reached the stage of conclusion of trial since only the evidence of the petitioner herein is to be adduced. It further appears that the instant transfer petition was filed after three years of the institution of the Matrimonial Suit and after it was dismissed for default, petitioner took more than 1½ years to seek its restoration. Meanwhile, the proceedings of the Matrimonial Suit had progressed to the stage of conclusion. Apart from the evidence of the petitioner herein, only the final argument is awaited.

7. In the aforesaid circumstances, this Court is of the view that the petitioner has not been able to make out a case for transfer of the Suit from the Family Court, Ranchi to the Family Court, Hazaribag. Needless to say, if the petitioner is inclined to appear as a witness, the opposite party husband may be called upon to pay suitable cost by the learned Family Court on such application made by her for the dates on which she is required to appear physically. Learned Family Court, Ranchi would also proceed to decide the Suit expeditiously without any further delay and parties

are supposed to cooperate in the proceedings without taking any unnecessary adjournment. The instant petition is dismissed, however with the observations made herein above.

(Aparesh Kumar Singh, J.) Shamim/