Orissa High Court
Tejaswari Muduli vs Himanshu Sekhar Mohanty ....... ... on 7 November, 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK
TRP(C) No.169 of 2025
Tejaswari Muduli ....... Petitioner
-Versus-
Himanshu Sekhar Mohanty ....... Opposite Party
Advocate for the parties
For Petitioner : Mr. R.K. Pradhan
Advocate
For Opposite Party : Mr. B. Sahoo
Advocate
...................
CORAM: JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA
Date of Hearing & Judgment : 07.11.2025
_____________________________________________________________
S.K. MISHRA, J.
1. This transfer petition has been preferred by the
Petitioner-Wife for transfer of proceeding in MAT Case No.52
of 2024 preferred by the Opposite Party-Husband under
section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, now pending in
the Court of learned Civil Judge (Sr.Div.), Talcher, to the
Court of learned Civil Judge (S.D.), Kuchinda in the district of
Sambalpur, on the grounds detailed in the transfer petition.
2. Though, being suggested by the learned Counsel
for the Parties, vide order dated 19.09.2025, parties were
directed to appear before the Secretary, District Legal Service
Authority, Sambalpur for mediation, as per the report
submitted by the Secretary-cum-Coordinator, District
Mediation Centre, Sambalpur vide letter no.1509 dated
15.10.2025, the mediation became unsuccessful and failed.
3. Hence, on consent of the learned Counsel for the
Parties, the transfer petition is taken up for hearing and
disposal at the stage of admission, permitting the Learned
Counsel for the Opposite Party-Husband to have his oral
objections, if any, to the prayer made in the transfer petition.
4. Heard learned Counsel for the Parties.
5. Reiterating the grounds urged in the transfer
petition, learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the
Petitioner-Wife is a deserted lady having no source of income.
After her desertion, she is dependent on her father. At present
she is staying at Kuchinda with her minor son, who is around
six years old.
5.1. That apart, the distance from Kuchinda to Talcher
would be around 110 K.Ms. It would be difficult on her part to
travel such a long distance to attend the Court proceeding on
each and every date before the Court of learned Civil Judge
(Sr.Div.), Talcher in MAT Case No.52 of 2024.
5.2. Drawing attention of this Court to para 6 of the
transfer petition, learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits,
though the Petitioner has appeared on 21.02.2025 along with
her advocate, but on the said date she received a direct threat
from the Opposite Party in the Court premises. Thereafter,
she thought it prudent not to appear in MAT Case No.52 of
2024, as it would be very risky on her part to attend the Court
proceeding at Talcher.
6. Per contra, learned Counsel for the Opposite Party
opposes to the said prayer for transfer stating that being
noticed, she has already appeared in MAT Case No.52 of 2024
by engaging a lawyer, who is taking steps in the said case
before the Court of learned Civil Judge (Sr.Div.), Talcher.
6.1. Learned Counsel for the Opposite Party further
submits, such allegation of receiving threat from his client on
21.02.2025 is incorrect. The Petitioner could have brought the
said fact to the notice of the leaned Court at Talcher or could
have lodged an FIR immediately before the local Police Station
at Talcher. No documentary proof has been annexed to the
transfer petition to demonstrate before this Court that the
said allegation is true.
7. Law is well settled that, while dealing with the
application for transfer of matrimonial proceedings, the Court
has to examine various factors and most important factor is
the convenience of wife.
8. At this juncture, it would be apt to deal with the
Judgment of the Supreme Court reported in 2022 SCC Online
SC 1199 (N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs. A.S. Saravana Karthik
Sha), wherein it was held as follows:-
"8. It is not disputed that the appellant is the
resident of Chennai and that the appellant's
husband-respondent herein is the resident of
Vellore and he is employed. The appellant
who is 21 years old does not have any
source of income of her own as she is not
employed and is totally dependent on her
parents for her livelihood. In order to attend
the court proceedings of the case filed by her
husband at Vellore she has to travel alone all
the way from Chennai to Vellore as her parents
are not in a position to accompany her on
account of their old age. Secondly, the
appellant has also filed a petition, H.M.O.P.
No.1741 of 2021, for restitution of conjugal
rights and another petition, M.C. Sr. No.672
of 2021, for her maintenance before the
Family Court at Chennai.
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 socioeconomic paradigm in the
Indian society, generally, it is the wife's
convenience which must be looked at while
considering transfer.
10. Further, when two or more proceedings are
pending in different Courts between the same
parties which raise common question of fact and
law, and when the decisions in the cases are
interdependent, it is desirable that they should
be tried together by the same Judge so as to
avoid multiplicity in trial of the same issues and
conflict of decisions."
(Emphasis Supplied)
9. In view of the grounds urged in the transfer petition
so also the settled position of law, the prayer for transfer of
MAT Case No.52 of 2024, pending in the Court of learned Civil
Judge, (Sr. Div.), Talcher to the Court of learned Civil Judge,
(Sr. Div.), Kuchinda is allowed.
10. The learned Civil Judge, (Sr. Div.), Talcher is directed
to transmit the case record in MAT Case No.52 of 2024 to the
Court of learned Civil Judge, (Sr. Div.), Kuchinda at the
earliest, preferably within a period of one week from the date
of production of certified copy of this judgment.
11. On receiving the case record in MAT Case No.52 of
2024 from the Court of learned Civil Judge, (Sr. Div.), Talcher,
the learned learned Civil Judge, (Sr. Div.), Kuchinda shall re-
register the said case, if so required, and proceed further in
accordance with law giving due opportunity to both the
parties.
12. The learned Civil Judge, (Sr. Div.), Kuchinda 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, if so prayed by any of the parties.
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 learned Civil Judge, (Sr. Div.), Kuchinda.
13. After the case is transferred to the Court of learned
Civil Judge, (Sr. Div.), Kuchinda, to avoid delay and notice,
both the Parties are directed to make a query before the
learned Civil Judge, (Sr. Div.), Kuchinda themselves or
through their Counsels to ascertain the date and purpose of
posting of MAT Case No.52 of 2024, and participate in the
said proceeding.
14. Both the Parties are further directed not to seek for
unnecessary adjournments and cooperate with the learned
Civil Judge, (Sr. Div.), Kuchinda, who shall do well to
conclude the said proceeding at the earliest, preferably within
a period of six months from the date of receipt of the records
from the Court of learned Civil Judge, (Sr. Div.), Talcher.
15. With the said observation and direction, the
transfer petition stands allowed and disposed of.
16. Office is directed to communicate a copy of this
judgment to the Court of learned Civil Judge, (Sr. Div.),
Talcher so also the learned Civil Judge, (Sr. Div.), Kuchinda
for compliance.
17. Interim order dated 08.07.2025 passed in I.A.
No.189 of 2025 stands vacated.
18. Urgent certified copy of this judgment be granted
on proper application as per rules.
...............................
S.K. MISHRA, J.
Orissa High Court, Cuttack.
Dated, 7th November, 2025/ Banita
Signed by: BANITA PRIYADARSHINI PALEI
Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK
Date: 08-Nov-2025 13:05:04
