Orissa High Court
Jagatmata Sahoo @ Barsha vs Jitendra Kumar Sahoo ....... Opposite ... on 30 July, 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK
TRP(C) No.353 of 2024
Jagatmata Sahoo @ Barsha ....... Petitioner
-Versus-
Jitendra Kumar Sahoo ....... Opposite Party
Advocate for the parties
For Petitioner : Mr. R. Chhotaray,
Advocate
For Opposite Party : Mr. S. Dwibedi,
Advocate
...................
CORAM: JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA
Date of Hearing & Judgment: 30.07.2025
_____________________________________________________________
S.K. MISHRA, J.
1. This transfer petition has been filed by the Petitioner-
wife for transfer of C.P No.25 of 2024 filed by the Opposite Party-
husband under Section 13(1) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1956 for
dissolution of marriage, pending in the Court of Judge, Family
Court, Boudh, to the Court of learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division),
Banki on the grounds detailed in the transfer petition.
2. Heard Learned Counsel for the parties.
3. Reiterating the grounds urged in the transfer petition,
learned Counsel for the Petitioner-wife submits, the Petitioner
being the deserted lady having no source of income, is at present
staying with her parents. It would be difficult on her part to attend
the day to day proceeding before the learned Judge, Family Court,
Boudh, as the distance from Banki to Boudh is about 160 K.Ms.
That apart, at her instance, D.V. Case No.7 of 2024 is now pending
in the Court of S.D.J.M., Banki and there is a life threat to her, if
she appears before the Court of learned Judge, Family Court,
Boudh, in C.P. No.25 of 2024.
4. Though no written objection has been filed by the
Opposite Party-husband opposing to such prayer for transfer of
the proceeding, learned Counsel for the Opposite Party submits,
since one of the cause of actions arose at Boudh, his client has
rightly preferred C.P. No.25 of 2024 before the Judge, Family
Court, Boudh. He further submits, if the prayer of the Petitioner is
allowed, it may cause hardship to the Opposite Party-husband to
attend the day to day proceeding at Banki, as he is doing business
at Boudh for his livelihood
5. Law is well settled that while dealing with transfer of
matrimonial proceedings, convenience of the wife must be looked
at. In N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs. A.S. Saravana Karthik Sha
reported in 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1199, the Supreme Court held as
follows:
"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."
(Emphasis supplied)
6. However, after going through the pleadings made in the
transfer petition so also taking note of the contentions of the
learned Counsel for the parties and the settled position of law, this
Court is inclined to allow the prayer made in the transfer petition.
7. The learned Judge, Family Court, Boudh is directed to
transmit the case record in C.P No.25 of 2024 to the Court of
learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Banki at the earliest, preferably
within a period of one week from the date of production of certified
copy of this judgment.
8. On receiving the case record in C.P No.25 of 2024 from
the Court of learned Judge, Family Court, Boudh, the learned Civil
Judge (Sr. Division), Banki shall re-register the said case, if so
required, and proceed further in accordance with law giving due
opportunity to both the parties.
9. As the Opposite Party-husband is allegedly staying at
Boudh, for convenience of the parties, the learned Civil Judge (Sr.
Division), Banki is requested to explore the facilities of Video
Conferencing available in the said Court and permit the parties to
appear before him through virtual mode following due procedure,
as prescribed under the Orissa High Court Video Conferencing for
Courts Rules, 2020. However, on the dates of effective hearing i.e.
for examination and cross-examination of witnesses and other
purposes, for which their presence may be required by the Court
and if it is so ordered, the parties shall remain physically present
before the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Banki.
10. To avoid delay and notice, both the parties are directed
to make a query themselves or through their counsel regarding the
date and purpose of posting of C.P No.25 of 2024 and attend the
Court of learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Banki. Both the parties
are further directed not to ask for unnecessary adjournments and
cooperate with the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Banki, who
shall do well to conclude the proceeding in C.P No.25 of 2024 at
the earliest.
11. With the said observation and direction, the transfer
petition stands disposed of.
12. Interim order dated 19.11.2024 passed in I.A. No.364
of 2024 stands vacated.
13. Office is directed to communicate a copy of this
judgment to the Court of learned Judge, Family Court, Boudh so
also the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Banki for compliance.
14. Urgent certified copy of this judgment be granted on
proper application as per rules.
...............................
S.K. MISHRA, J.
Orissa High Court, Cuttack.
Dated, 30th July, 2025/ Prasant
Signed by: PRASANT KUMAR PRADHAN
Date: 01-Aug-2025 18:47:59
