Madhya Pradesh High Court
Smt. Kamini Lodhi (Verma) vs Jitendra Kumar Lodhi (Verma) on 6 January, 2023
Author: Maninder S. Bhatti
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANINDER S. BHATTI
ON THE 6 th OF JANUARY, 2023
REVIEW PETITION No. 3 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
SMT. KAMINI LODHI (VERMA) W/O SHRI JITENDRA
KUMAR LODHI VERMA, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: HOUSE WIFE H.NO. 3310 NEAR HARDOUL
MANDIR OLD KANCHANPUR POLICE STATION
ADHARTAL DISTRICT JABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI SANDESH DIXIT - ADVOCATE )
AND
JITENDRA KUMAR LODHI (VERMA) S/O LATE
NARAYAN LODHI, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: GOVERNMENT SERVICE A/23 SHIV
NAGAR VIDHISHA ROAD POLICE STATION CHHOLA
MANDIR DISTRICT BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI AKSHAY PAWAR - ADVOCATE )
This petition coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the
following:
ORDER
The review petitioner has filed this petition seeking review of the order
dated 21-12-2022 passed in M.C.C. No.151/2022.
2. Learned counsel for petitioner contends that an application under
Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure [for brevity "CPC"] was filed before
this Court seeking transfer of Civil Suit No.RCSHM 881/2021 which was
pending in the Family Court, Bhopal to Family Court, Jabalpur. It is contended
by the learned counsel that this Court vide order dated 21-12-2022 passed in
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AJAY KUMAR
CHATURVEDI
Signing time: 1/11/2023
3:24:40 PM
M.C.C. No.151/2022 has disposed of the said application while extending
liberty to petitioner to enter appearance before the Court through
videoconferencing.
3. It is contended by learned counsel for petitioner that the petitioner
has filed an application under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 [for
short "the Act"] before the Family Court, Jabalpur which has been registered as
RCSHM No.567/2019 (Smt. Kamini @ Shrasthi Lodhi vs. Jitendra Kumar
Lodhi) and the petitioner has also preferred another application under Section
125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure before the Family Court, Jabalpur vide
case No.MJCR 629/2019.
4. It is argued by the learned counsel for petitioner that thereafter
respondent has filed an application under Section 13 of the Act before the
Family Court, Bhopal which is registered as Civil Suit No.RCSHM 881/2021
regarding which an application seeking transfer was moved by the petitioner
which has been decided by this Court vide order dated 21-12-2022 in M.C.C.
No.151/2022.
5. Learned counsel for petitioner strenuously urged that in the
present case, in terms of the provisions of Section 21-A of the Act, the case
which has been filed by respondent vide RCSHM No.881/2021 in the Family
Court, Bhopal, ought to have been transferred to Jabalpur. It is submitted by
the learned counsel that this Court did not appreciate the scope of Section 21-A
of the Act, while passing the order dated 21-1-2-2022 in M.C.C. No.151/2022
and the order deserves to be recalled. The petitioner has relied on the judgment
passed by the Apex Court in N.C.V. Aishwarya vs. A.S. Saravana Karthik
Sha, (Civil Appeal No.4894 of 2022, dt.18.7.2022).
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AJAY KUMAR
CHATURVEDI
Signing time: 1/11/2023
3:24:40 PM
6. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent submits that in the
present case Section 21-A of the Act is not applicable, inasmuch as petitioner
has filed an application under Section 9 of the Act, whereas respondent has
preferred an application under Section 13 of the Act. Therefore, as Section 21-
A of the Act does not deal with an application under Section 9 of the Act,
contention of the petitioner is misconceived.
7. Heard rival submissions advanced on behalf of the parties and
perused the record.
8. In the present case, in order to deal with contention of the
petitioner, it is first germane to refer to Section 21-A of the Act, which is
extracted hereunder :
"[21-A. Power to transfer petitions in certain cases. Where
(a) a petition under this Act has been presented to a district
court having jurisdiction by a party to a marriage praying for a
decree for judicial separation under Section 10 or for a decree of
divorce under Section 13, and
(b) another petition under this Act has been presented
thereafter by the other party to the marriage praying for a decree
for judicial separation under Section 10 or for a decree of divorce
under Section 13 on any ground, whether in the same district court
or in a different district court, in the same State or in a different
State.
the petitions shall be dealt with as specified in sub-section
(2).
(2) In a case where sub-section (1) applies,â€ÂÂ"
(a) if the petitions are presented to the same district court,
both the petitions shall be tried and heard together by that district
court;
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AJAY KUMAR
CHATURVEDI
Signing time: 1/11/2023
3:24:40 PM
(b) if the petitions are presented to different district courts,
the petition presented later shall be transferred to the district court
in which the earlier petition was presented and both the petitions
shall be heard and disposed of together by the district court in
which the earlier petition was presented.
(3) In a case where clause (b) of sub-section (2) applies, the
court or the Government, as the case may be, competent under the
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908), to transfer any suit or
proceeding from the district court in which the later petition has
been presented to the district court in which the earlier petition is
pending, shall exercise its powers to transfer such later petition as
if it had been empowered so to do under the said Code."
9. A perusal of Section 21-A of the Act reveals that where a petition
under the Hindu Marriage Act has been presented to District Court by a party to
a marriage praying decree for judicial separation under Section 10 of the Act or
for a decree of divorce under Section 13 of the Act; and another petition under
this Act has been presented thereafter by the other party to the marriage
praying for a decree for judicial separation under Section 10 or for a decree of
divorce under Section 13 on any ground, whether in the court of District Judge
or in a different District Court, the petition presented later, shall be transferred
to the District Court in which the earlier petition was presented.
10. In the present case, according to the petitioner's own showing
that the petitioner has filed an application under Section 9 of the Act and has
not filed any application under Section 10 or 13 of the Act. Thus, the
contention as is being sought to be canvassed is ill founded and there is no
provision regarding Section 9 of the Act within the ambit and scope of Section
21-A of the Act. Reliance placed on N.V.V. Aishwarya (supra) is
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AJAY KUMAR
CHATURVEDI
Signing time: 1/11/2023
3:24:40 PM
misconceived.
11. Even otherwise, this Court while deciding the M.C.C.
No.151/2022, has passed an innocuous order and has extended liberty to
petitioner to enter appearance through videoconferencing and liberty has also
been extended to the concerned Family Court, to order personal appearance of
petitioner, if it is considered imperative.
12. Therefore, there is no error in the impugned order, which is
being sought to be pointed out by the petitioner in the present review petition.
13. Accordingly, the present review petition being sans substratum,
is dismissed. No order as to costs.
MANINDER S. BHATTI)
JUDGE
ac.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AJAY KUMAR
CHATURVEDI
Signing time: 1/11/2023
3:24:40 PM
