Karnataka High Court
Smt Shobha Aliyas Vedha W/O ... vs Sri Satishkumar S/O Kashinath ... on 10 November, 2023
Bench: K.S.Hemalekha
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC-D:13144
CP No. 100025 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA
CIVIL PETITION NO.100025 OF 2023
BETWEEN:
SMT. VEDA @ SHOBHA W/O SATISHKUMAR,
D/O. GURUPADAPPA KADEKOPPA,
AGE 32 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O: DOTIHAL, TQ: KUSHTAGI, DIST: KOPPAL.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. D.V. PATTAR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
SRI. SATISHKUMAR
S/O. KASHINATH RAKKASAGI,
Digitally
AGE 38 YEARS, OCC: PRIVATE EMPLOYEE,
signed by
VISHAL
R/O: 3RD CROSS, SIRGUPPA CROSS ROAD,
VISHAL NINGAPPA KURAHATTI, BALLARI, TQ & DIST: BALLARI.
NINGAPPA PATTIHAL
PATTIHAL Date:
2023.11.15
...RESPONDENT
13:19:52
+0530
(NOTICE TO SOLE RESPONDENT IS SERVED)
THIS CIVIL PETITION IS FILED U/S.24 OF CPC,
PRAYING TO TRANSFER THE MC NO. 233/2022 FILED BY
THE RESPONDENT PENDING ON THE FILE OF LEARNED
PRINCIPAL JUDGE FAMILY COURT, BALLARI TO LEARNED
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC KUSHTAGI, IN THE
INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS CIVIL PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION,
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC-D:13144
CP No. 100025 of 2023
ORDER
The present petition by the wife seeking to withdraw
M.C. No.233/2022 pending on the file of the Prl. Judge,
Family Court, Ballari and transfer the same to the Senior
Civil Judge & JMFC, Kushtagi.
2. It is the case of the petitioner that the
petitioner is the wife of the respondent and their marriage
was solemnized on 18.12.2020 as per the customs and
traditions prevailing in their community at Ballari. Due to
un-cordial relationship between the petitioner and the
respondent, they are living separately. It appears that the
petitioner - wife has filed Crl. Misc. No.2/2023 before the
Civil Judge & JMFC, Kustagi Koppal seeking maintenance
and the respondent - husband has filed petition in M.C.
No.233/2022 before the Family Court, Ballari seeking
restitution of conjugal rights under Section 9 of the Hindu
Marriage Act, 1955.
3. Heard Sri.D.V. Pattar, learned counsel
appearing for the petitioner. Though notice has been duly
NC: 2023:KHC-D:13144
CP No. 100025 of 2023
served on the respondent on 20.05.2023, he has chosen
to remain absent.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
would contend that the petitioner is residing at Kushtagi,
the distance between Kushtagi to Ballari is around 150
kms, causing inconvenience to the wife to attend the
proceedings initiated by the husband at Ballari, moreover
there are financial constraint also to the wife to attend the
proceedings at Ballari as well. It is further contended that
in a matrimonial matters, convenience of the wife takes a
paramount concern while transferring the petition from
one place to another.
5. Section 24 of CPC enumerates this Court to
exercise the power to transfer the petition, suit, appeal or
other proceedings where justice demands. In transfer
petition, where the transfer is sought by the wife, the
convenience of wife needs to be considered as held by the
Apex Court in catena of judgments in line. The Apex Court
in the case of Sumita Singh Vs. Kumar Sanjay and
NC: 2023:KHC-D:13144
CP No. 100025 of 2023
another1 has held that convenience of the wife must be
looked into.
6. The Apex Court in the recent decision, in the
case of N.C.V. Aishwarya vs. A.S.Saravana Karthik
Sha2 has held that at paragraph No.9, which reads as
under:
"9. The cardinal principle for exercise of
power under Section 24 of the Code of Civil
Procedure is that the ends of justice should demand
the transfer of the suit, appeal or other proceeding.
In matrimonial matters, wherever Courts are called
upon to consider the plea of transfer, the Courts
have to take into consideration the economic
soundness of both the parties, the social strata of
the spouses and their behavioural pattern, their
standard of life prior to the marriage and
subsequent thereto and the circumstances of both
the parties in eking out their livelihood and under
whose protective umbrella they are seeking their
sustenance to life. Given the prevailing socio-
economic paradigm in the Indian society, generally,
it is the wife's convenience which must be looked at
while considering transfer."
7. In the instant case, the petitioner is an young
lady residing in Kushtagi at her parents' house. The travel
distance from Kushtagi to Ballari is around 150 kms.
AIR 2002 SC 396
2022 SCC OnLine SC 119
NC: 2023:KHC-D:13144
CP No. 100025 of 2023
causing inconvenience to the petitioner-wife to attend the
proceedings initiated by her husband at Ballari.
8. For the aforesaid reasons, this Court is of the
considered view that the petition filed by the wife needs to
be allowed. Accordingly, this Court pass the following:
ORDER
(i) The civil petition is allowed.
(ii) M.C. No.233/2022 pending on the file of
the Prl. Judge, Family Court, Ballari is
withdrawn and same is transferred to the
Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Kushtagi.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Vnp* / CT : UMD
