Karnataka High Court
Arpita vs K R Chidambara on 15 November, 2024
Author: M.G.S.Kamal
Bench: M.G.S.Kamal
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:8554
CP No. 200038 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S.KAMAL
CIVIL PETITION NO. 200038 OF 2024
BETWEEN:
SMT. ARPITA W/O CHIDAMBARA,
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
R/O. NO. 609, BHARAT PRIDE APARTMENTS,
HUMNABAD ROAD, KALABURAGI,
TQ. AND DIST. KALABURAGI-585103.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI ARUNKUMAR AMARGUNDAPPA, ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed AND:
by SACHIN
Location: HIGH MR K. R. CHIDAMBARA S/O RADHAKRISHNA,
COURT OF AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, OCC: CONTRACTOR,
KARNATAKA R/O. # 2814, JAYANAGARA, 2ND MAIN,
MYSURU-570014.
...RESPONDENT
(RESPONDENT SERVED)
THIS CP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 24 OF THE CPC,
PRAYING TO, TRANSFER THE PETITION IN M.C NO.418/2022
PENDING ON THE FILE OF II ADDITIONAL PRINCIPAL JUDGE,
FAMILY COURT, MYSURU TO THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE FAMILY
COURT KALABURAGI.
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:8554
CP No. 200038 of 2024
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S.KAMAL
ORAL ORDER
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S.KAMAL)
This petition is filed by the petitioner-wife seeking
transfer of petition bearing M.C.No.418/2022 filed by the
respondent-husband under Section 13 (1) (ia) of the
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 on the file of II Additional
Principal Judge, Family Court, Mysuru to the Principal
Judge, Family Court, Kalaburagi.
2. That notice of the petition though served,
respondent - husband has remained absent.
3. It is the case of the petitioner that her marriage
with respondent was solemnized on 10.05.2020 as per
Hindu customs and rituals. The marriage was one of the
inter-caste marriage. After the marriage, the respondent
and his family members started harassing the petitioner
by demanding additional dowry and also started to
NC: 2024:KHC-K:8554
humiliate the petitioner her. In this regard, the petitioner
lodged a complaint before the jurisdictional police, Mysuru
against the respondent and his family members and the
same is registered in Crime No.10/2021 for the offences
punishable under Sections 498(a), 323, 504, 307, read
with 34 of IPC and 3 and 4 of DP Act and Section 3(2) (va)
of SC/ST (POA) Act and the same is pending before the IV
Additional District and Sessions Judge at Mysuru.
4. The respondent-husband has filed petition
before the Vacation Family Court, Mysore seeking
dissolution of marriage with the petitioner-wife in
M.C.No.3/2022, soon after receipt of notice the petitioner-
wife had filed C.P.No.200029/2022 and got interim order
and issued notice to the respondent-husband. The
respondent on his appearance informed the Court about
ex-parte judgment and decree passed by the Family Court,
Mysuru. After receipt of information with regard to
ex-parte judgment and decree, the petitioner-wife filed an
application to set aside the ex-parte judgment and decree.
NC: 2024:KHC-K:8554
5. The Family Court, after hearing the parties, set
aside the ex-parte judgment and decree and permitting
the petitioner-wife to contest the petition in
M.C.No.418/2022 by order dated 27.04.2024 and directed
the petitioner-wife and respondent-husband to appear
before the Family Court, Mysuru on 27.06.2024.
6. Pursuant to the direction issued by the Family
Court, Mysuru, the petitioner-wife could not appear
physically on account of great inconvenience as the Family
Court, Mysuru is far away from Kalaburagi district.
7. The learned counsel further submits that
distance between Kalaburagi and Mysuru is about 710
kms., and petitioner is not in a position to travel all the
way to Mysuru from Kalaburagi to attend and prosecute
the matter. The petitioner-wife is under reasonable
apprehension of dire consequences, threatening etc at the
hands of respondent-husband and his family members.
8. Heard and perused the records.
NC: 2024:KHC-K:8554
9. There is no dispute with regard to the marriage
having been solemnized between the petitioner and the
respondent on 10.05.2020. There is also no dispute of the
fact that the petitioner is presently residing at Kalaburagi
within the jurisdiction of the Family Court at Kalaburagi.
Even under Section 19 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955
petition is required to be filed where the wife resides. The
petitioner-wife is now residing along with her parents at
Kalaburagi, since parents are age old persons, they cannot
accompany the petitioner-wife to Mysuru and respondent-
husband has filed the petition under Section 13(1)(i-a) of
the Hindu Marriage Act deliberately to harass the
petitioner-wife. That apart, in order to protect the
interest, rights of the petitioner-wife and to enable her to
contest and adduce evidence without fear and secure ends
of justice. Hence, the case required to be transferred.
10. Hence, the following:
ORDER
(i) The Civil Petition is allowed.
NC: 2024:KHC-K:8554
(ii) The petition in M.C No.418/2022, pending on
the file of the II Additional Principal Judge,,
Family Court, Mysore is to be transferred to
the Principal Judge, Family Court,
Kalaburagi.
(iii) The Registry shall communicate this order to
the Principal Judge, Family Court, Kalaburagi
to take necessary steps for transfer of the
proceedings in M.C No.418/2022 to the Court
of Principal Judge, Family Court, Kalaburagi
and proceed in accordance with law.
Sd/-
(M.G.S.KAMAL)
JUDGE
KBM
CT:PK
