Smt. Rakhi @ Pari Rajpal vs Umesh Rajpal
2021 Latest Caselaw 5664 MP

                                    1                               MCC-349-2021
       The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                  MCC-349-2021
                     (SMT. RAKHI @ PARI RAJPAL Vs UMESH RAJPAL)

3
Jabalpur, Dated : 20-09-2021
      Heard through Video Conferencing.

      Miss Rashi Dua, counsel for the applicant.
      Shri Nitesh K. Jain, counsel for the respondent.

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

This is an application filed under Section 24 of the Code of Civil

Procedure for transfer of matrimonial case registered as Regular Civil Suit HM No. 83/2020 pending before the Principal Judge Family Court, Sagar to Jabalpur.

As per the applicant/wife the marriage between her and the respondent was solemnized on 31.01.2016 as per the Hindu rites at District Sagar and after marriage she started living with the respondent at her in-laws house at Sagar. Initially they were living happily, but, those days of happiness did not continue for a long time and the relation

between them had become bad to worse.

As per the wife, the respondent started misbehaving with her and used to make demand of dowry and for not fulfilling the said demand, he used to torture and harass the applicant mentally and physically. It is also submitted by the applicant/wife that out of the said wedlock, she has given birth to a child, but, the respondent and his family members have thrown out her alongwith child from their house. Thereafter, when she found no way left, she lodged an FIR against the respondent and his family members for the offences under Section 498-A of IPC and 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act at Police Station, Sihora. As the applicant/wife was being harassed and deserted by the respondent/husband and was also not having any source of income, she 2 MCC-349-2021 filed an application under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sihora, which was registered as MJC No. 108/2020, which is pending. The applicant also instituted an application under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal right, which is also pending for adjudication before the II Additional

District Judge, Sihora.

The respondent/husband has also filed a suit under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 seeking decree of divorce against the applicant. The said suit has been registered as Civil Suit HM No. 83/2020 and is pending before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Sagar.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that Sagar is at a distance of more thann 200 Kms from Sihora and it is very difficult for the applicant to go to Sagar and attend hearing of the case on each and every date because she is a household lady and has no source of earning. She is fully dependent upon her parents and some how she is managing to survive alongwith her child. Therefore, it is claimed that considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that when three cases are already pending at Sihora and respondent uses to come to attend hearing of those cases at Sihora, it would be better and in the interest of justice that the case pending at Sagar i.e. Civil Suit HM No. 83/2020 filed by the respondent be transferred to Sihora. In support of his contention, learned counsel has relied upon the judgments reported in 2004(4) MPLJ 310- Laxmi Vs. Jitendra Kumar and 2007(2) MPHT 344-Paramjeet Kaur vs. Dharam Pal.

Per contra, Shri Jain appearing for the respondent has opposed the submission made by the learned counsel for the applicant and submitted that the civil suit seeking decree of divorce under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act filed by the respondent is prior in time than the cases filed by the applicant and, therefore, it would not be in the interest 3 MCC-349-2021 of justice to transfer the case filed by the respondent/husband to Sihora from Sagar.

After considering the rival submission made by the learned counsel for the parties and the facts of the case, it is clear that three cases filed by the applicant/wife are already pending at Sihora. The applicant is a household lady and she has no proper source of earning. She has also a minor child and, therefore, it would be difficult for her to travel up and down from Sihora to Sagar at a distance of more than 200 Kms. to attend the hearing of the case at Sagar on each and every date fixed by the court. The Supreme Court in the case of Sumjta Singh vs. Kumar Sanjay and

another, AIR 2002 SC 396 , which was a transfer petition filed by the wife for transfer of matrimonial case, after considering the facts and circumstances of the case has held as under:

"This is a transfer petition by the wife. She seeks the tranfer of matrimonial proceedings filed by the husband against her in Ara, Bhojpur to Delhi. It is her case that she is now living and working in Delhi and that she would be unable to travel up and down from Delhi to Ara, a distance of about 1100 Kilometers from Delhi to defend the matrimonial proceedings. She also states that she has no one with whom she can stay in Ara because her parents are residents of Gurgaon.

2. Learned counsel for the husband states that the wife is an educated woman who is doing very well and can, therefore, travel to Ara while the husband is unemployed.

3. It is the husband's suit against the wife. It is the wife's convenience that therefore, must be looked at. The circumstances indicated above are sufficient to make the transfer petition absolute.

4 MCC-349-2021

4. Accordingly, Matrimonial Case No. 30 of 2000 pending before the VIth Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ara, Bhojpur, Bihar shall stand transferred to the District Judge, Delhi, who shall hear it himself or assign it for hearing to an appropriate forum."

The view taken by the Supreme Court has also been followed by this Court in several decisions, one of which is Savita Rai vs. Sunil Kumar Rai, 2006(2) MPLJ 111 In view of the discussion made hereinabove and the facts and circumstances of the case and also the decisions rendered by the Supreme Court and also by the High Court in the cases of Sumjta Singh and Savita Rai (supra) respectively, it would be appropriate to transfer the matrimonial case filed by the respondent/husband registered vide Civil Suit HM No. 83/2020 pending before the Family Court, Sagar to Jabalpur because Family Court is not available at Sihora.

Accordingly, this application is allowed.

It is directed that the matrimonial case filed by the respondent/husband registered vide Civil Suit HM No. 83/2020 pending before the Family Court, Sagar shall stand transferred to Family Court, Jabalpur. The Principal Judge, Family Court, Sagar is directed to transmit the record of Civil Suit HM 83/2020 to Family Court, Jabalpur so as to try the same at Jabalpur, which would be a convenient place for the applicant/wife to make her appearance in the said case and attend the hearing of the case on the dates fixed by the court. It is further directed that after receiving the record of the said case, the Family Court Jabalpur shall issue notices to both the parties fixing the date for hearing of the case.

With the aforesaid, this application is allowed and disposed of accordingly.

                                              5           MCC-349-2021


                                                 (SANJAY DWIVEDI)
                                                      JUDGE


RAGHVENDRA



RAGHVE   Digitally signed by RAGHVENDRA
         SHARAN SHUKLA
         DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF


NDRA
         MADHYA PRADESH, ou=HIGH
         COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH,
         postalCode=482002, st=Madhya
         Pradesh,


SHARAN
         2.5.4.20=0b4ca33e82678112c8b8
         779ae1f77dd53c66b97e56d85ed6
         193d6ff614e6a268,
         cn=RAGHVENDRA SHARAN


SHUKLA
         SHUKLA
         Date: 2021.09.21 18:27:22 +05'30'