Orissa High Court
Swarnalata Badatya vs Niranjan Badatya ....... Opposite ... on 10 November, 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK
TRP(C) No.165 of 2024
Swarnalata Badatya ....... Petitioner
-Versus-
Niranjan Badatya ....... Opposite Party
TRPCRL No.72 of 2024
Niranjan Badatya ....... Petitioner
-Versus-
Swarnalata Badatya ....... Opposite Party
TRPCRL No.73 of 2024
Niranjan Badatya ....... Petitioner
-Versus-
Swarnalata Badatya ....... Opposite Party
Advocate for the parties
For Petitioner : Ms. P. Bastia,
(In TRPC No.165 of 2024) Advocate
For Petitioner : Mr. K.A. Guru,
(In TRPCRL Nos.72 & 73 of 2024) Advocate
For Opposite Party : Mr. K.A. Guru,
(In TRPC No.165 of 2024) Advocate
For Opposite Party : Ms. P. Bastia,
(In TRPCRL Nos.72 & 73 of 2024) Advocate
...................
Page 1 of 10
CORAM: JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA
Date of Hearing & Judgment: 10.11.2025
_____________________________________________________________
S.K. MISHRA, J.
1. TRP(C) No.165 of 2024 has been preferred by the
Petitioner-Wife for transfer of proceeding in C.P. No.165 of 2024
filed by the Opposite Party-Husband under section 13 (1) of the
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for decree of divorce, now pending in
the Court of learned Judge, Family Court, Berhampur, to the
Court of learned Judge, Family Court, Rourkela.
2. Similarly, TRPCRL No.72 of 2024 has been preferred
by the Petitioner-Husband for transfer of proceeding in Criminal
Proceeding No.42 of 2024 initiated by the Opposite Party-Wife
under Section 125 of Cr.P.C for maintenance, now pending in
the Court of learned Judge, Family Court, Rourkela to the Court
of learned Judge, Family Court, Berhampur.
3. TRPCRL No.73 of 2024 has also been preferred by the
Petitioner-Husband for transfer of proceeding in Crl. Misc. Case
No.298 of 2023 preferred by the Opposite Party-Wife under
Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence
Act, 2005, now pending in the Court of learned S.D.J.M. (P),
Uditnagar, Rourkela, to the Court of learned S.D.J.M,
Berhampur.
4. In all the three transfer petitions, which are on
board, the parties being same and the issues pertaining to these
transfer petitions, being common, are taken up together for
hearing and final disposal vide this common Judgment.
5. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.
6. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner in TRP(C) No.165
of 2024 submits, the Petitioner being a destitute lady having no
source of income, is staying with her parents at Rourkela and
there is no male member in her matrimonial house to
accompany her to travel from Rourkela to Berhampur, which
would be around 500 KMs. away. It would be very difficult on
her part to travel such a long distance to attend the day to day
proceeding in C.P. No.165 of 2024, which is now pending before
the learned Judge, Family Court, Berhampur. She further
submits, after her desertion, the Petitioner-Wife has not been
paid any amount by the Opposite Party-Husband, even though
she has filed an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. for
maintenance before the learned Judge, Family Court, Rourkela,
which has been registered as Criminal Proceeding No.42 of
2024. Hence, without any income to maintain her livelihood so
also to bear the litigation and traveling expenses, it would be
difficult on her part to attend the proceeding at Berhampur.
7. Drawing attention of this Court to the averments
made in paragraphs-4 & 5 of the transfer petition, learned
Counsel for the Petitioner further submits, at the instance of the
Petitioner-Wife, Crl. Misc. Case No.298 of 2023 filed under
Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence
Act is now pending before the S.D.J.M. (P), Uditnagar, Rourkela.
Though the Opposite Party-Husband is at present working as
Software Engineer at Bengaluru, being noticed, he has appeared
in both the said proceedings at Rourkela. Even if, it has not
been averred in the transfer petition, it has been admitted by the
Opposite Party-husband in his transfer petition that, at the
instance of the Petitioner-Wife, a proceeding under Section 498-
A read with Section 4 of D.P. Act, is also pending in the Court of
learned S.D.J.M. (P), Uditnagar, Rourkela.
8. Per contra, Mr. Guru, learned Counsel for the
Opposite Party-Husband, who is the Petitioner in TRPCRL.
Nos.72 & 73, both of 2024, submits that his client is facing
much difficulty to attend all the proceedings pending before
various Courts at Rourkela. Hence, being compelled, he
approached this Court for transfer of those proceedings from
Rourkela to Berhampur. He further submits, instead of
Berhampur, if all the proceedings are transferred to
Bhubaneswar, a place having good flight connectivity; it would
be convenient for his client to attend all the proceedings at
Bhubaneswar.
9. Mr. Guru, learned Counsel for the Opposite Party-
Husband further submits, if the Petitioner-Wife has any
difficulty to appear before the Court at Berhampur, she may
approach the concerned Court to permit her to appear through
virtual mode.
10. Law is well settled that, while considering the
transfer petitions for transfer of matrimonial proceedings, the
convenience of the wife must be looked at. That apart, law is
also well settled that where two or more proceedings are pending
before different Courts, which raise common question of fact
and law, and when the decisions in those cases are
interdependent, the proceedings are to be tried together to avoid
multiplicity in trial of the same issues and conflict of decisions.
11. In (N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs. A.S. Saravana Karthik
Sha), reported in 2022 SCC Online SC 1199, the Supreme
Court observed 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
behavioral 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.
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)
12. Admittedly, the husband has filed C.P. No.165 of
2024 under Section 13 (1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for
decree of divorce, which is now pending in the Court of learned
Judge, Family Court at Berhampur. The wife has filed Criminal
Proceeding No.42 of 2024 under section 125 of Cr.P.C. for
maintenance before the Court of learned Judge, Family Court,
Rourkela so also Crl. Misc. Case No.298 of 2023 under Section
12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act,
2005 before the S.D.J.M. (P), Uditnagar, Rourkela. The husband
has appeared and is contesting those cases before the Court of
learned Judge, Family Court so also S.D.J.M. (P), Uditnagar at
Rourkela. That apart, the issue regarding maintenance to be
paid to the wife, during pendency of the aforesaid proceedings,
also has a bearing with the said matrimonial proceedings.
Hence, this Court is of the view that both the proceedings, i.e.,
C.P. No.165 of 2024 and Criminal Proceeding No.42 of 2024
involve common question of fact and law. Thus, it is desirable
that both the aforesaid cases should be tried together by the
same Judge so as to avoid multiplicity in trial of the same
issues and conflicting decisions.
13. After taking note of the pleadings on record of each
transfer petition, submissions made by the learned Counsel for
the parties, the settled position of law and the views taken by
this Court, as detailed above, this Court is of further view that
the prayer made in TRP(C) No.165 of 2024 preferred by the
Petitioner-Wife deserves to be allowed whereas; the prayers
made by the Petitioner-Husband in TRPCRL No.72 of 2024 and
TRPCRL No.73 of 2024 deserve to be rejected. Accordingly,
TRP(C) No.165 of 2024 stands disposed of as allowed whereas;
TRPCRL No.72 of 2024 and TRPCRL No.73 of 2024 stand
dismissed with the following directions and observations.
14. The learned Judge, Family Court, Berhampur is
directed to transmit the case record in C.P. No.165 of 2024 to
the Court of learned Judge, Family Court, Rourkela at the
earliest, preferably within a period of one week from the date of
production of certified copy of this judgment.
15. On receiving the case records in C.P. No.165 of 2024
from the Court of learned Judge, Family Court, Berhampur, the
learned Judge, Family Court, Rourkela shall re-register the said
case, if so required and proceed further in accordance with law
giving due opportunity to both the parties.
16. Since Criminal Proceeding No.42 of 2024, at the
instance of the Petitioner-Wife, is pending before the same
Court, for convenience of parties, both C.P. No.165 of 2024 and
Criminal Proceeding No.42 of 2024 be tried together by posting
both the said cases to same date.
17. The learned Judge, Family Court, Rourkela 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 Judge, Family Court, Rourkela.
18. To avoid delay and notice, the parties are directed to
make a query themselves or through their Counsel regarding
the date and purpose of posting of C.P. Case No.165 of 2024 so
also Criminal Proceeding No.42 of 2024 and participate in both
the proceedings. They are further directed not to ask for
unnecessary adjournments and cooperate with the learned
Judge, Family Court, Rourkela, who shall do well to conclude
both the proceedings in C.P. No.165 of 2024 & Criminal
Proceeding No.42 of 2024 at the earliest.
19. It is made clear that since the Opposite Party-
husband is represented through a lawyer in Crl. Misc. Case
No.298 of 2023, now pending in the Court of learned S.D.J.M.
(P), Uditnagar, Rourkela, he is not required to appear on each
and every date of proceeding of the said case. However, if at all,
he faces any difficulty on any date to appear in the said
proceeding physically, he may move appropriate application in
Crl. Misc. Case No.298 of 2023 before the learned Court below
to allow him to appear through virtual mode. It is made further
clear that, if such an application is moved, the learned S.D.J.M.
(P), Uditnagar, Rourkela shall act in terms of the observations
made in para-17 of this Judgment.
20. Office is directed to communicate a copy of this
Judgment to the Court of learned Judge, Family Court,
Rourkela, so also the learned Judge, Family Court, Berhampur
for compliance and the learned S.D.J.M. (P), Uditnagar,
Rourkela for information and necessary action.
21. Urgent certified copy of this Judgment be granted on
proper application as per rules.
...............................
S.K. MISHRA, J.
Orissa High Court, Cuttack.
Dated, the 10th November, 2025/ Prasant
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack.
Date: 11-Nov-2025 18:57:29
