Rajasthan High Court

Neha Singh W/O Shri Sunil Kumar D/O ... vs Shri Sunil Kumar S/O Shri Jagdish ... on 6 August, 2021

Bench: Rameshwar Vyas

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                  BENCH AT JAIPUR

         S. B. Civil Transfer Application No. 9/2021

Neha Singh W/o Shri Sunil Kumar D/o Shri Mahipal Singh Dhaka,
Aged About 34 Years, R/o Behind Maru Girls College, Fatehpur
Road, Sikar, Tehsil And District Sikar, Presently Residing At Flat
No. 111, Nakshatra Apartment, Gyan Vihar, Near Bk Kaul Nagar,
Kotra, Ajmer-305001
                                                                     ----Petitioner
                                      Versus
Shri Sunil Kumar S/o Shri Jagdish Prasad, Aged About 35 Years,
R/o Ganpati Plaza Ke Samne Wali Gali, Near Railway Overbridge,
Piprali Road, Sikar,
                                                                   ----Respondent

For Petitioner(s)           :     Mr. Nathu Singh Chauhan
For Respondent(s)           :     Mr. M.S. Saharan



          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESHWAR VYAS

                                       Order

August 6, 2021

The instant transfer application under Section 24 of the Code

of Civil Procedure, 1908 has been preferred by the applicant-wife

seeking transfer of the divorce petition filed under Section 13 of

the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (afterwards referred to as "the Act

of 1955") for dissolution of marriage bearing CIS No. 138/2020

titled as "Sunil Kumar Vs. Neha Singh" from Family Court, Sikar to

Family Court, Ajmer.

As per averments made in the application, the marriage

between the applicant and the non-applicant was solemnized on

30.04.2012 at Sikar in accordance with Hindu rites; thereafter,

both of them started living together as husband and wife at Sikar.

The applicant came to be appointed on the post of Assistant

(2 of 6) [CTA-9/2021]

Manager Scale - I in Baroda Rajasthan Kshetriya Gramin Bank in

the year 2016 and remained posted at Sikar upto October, 2020.

The applicant resided with her in-laws at Sikar in her matrimonial

home while she was posted at Sikar. Presently, she is working on

the post of Manager Scale - II in the Head Office of Baroda

Rajasthan Kshetriya Gramin Bank at Ajmer and is residing there.

The non-applicant and his parent started taunting at the applicant

for extraneous reasons without any fault on her part. When the

family situation at her matrimonial home became unbearable,

applicant having no option submitted an application before the

higher authorities of the Bank seeking her transfer from Sikar to

Ajmer in the month of July, 2020. The applicant sought transfer

under the belief that after her transfer from Sikar, the family

situation will get normalized. The non-applicant after resigning

from Modi Institute, Laxmangarh in the year 2017, has joined the

multinational company at Jaipur. In the month of July, 2020,

when the applicant sought transfer from Sikar to Ajmer, the non-

applicant with malafide intention filed the divorce petition under

Section 13(1)(i-a)(i-b) of the Act of 1955 seeking dissolution of

marriage before the Family Court, Sikar on the basis of false

allegations on 28.07.2020. The father of the applicant is a retired

employee of National Textile Corporation, a Public Sector

Undertaking. In such circumstances, it is very difficult for the

applicant to travel from Ajmer to Sikar to attend the family court

proceedings as she has to take leave on each date of hearing.

The applicant is suffering from back ache and has been advised to

avoid jerks and travelling and therefore, it is very difficult and

strenuous for the applicant to travel from Ajmer to Sikar from time

to time for attending the court proceedings. Besides, the

(3 of 6) [CTA-9/2021]

applicant has reasonable apprehension that her in-laws and

husband can threaten and pressurize her while attending the court

proceedings at Sikar. The non-applicant is serving at Jaipur and if

the divorce petition filed by him is transferred to Family Court,

Ajmer then, there will not be any harassment to him. The balance

of convenience lies in favour of the applicant. On the above

grounds, the present transfer petition has been filed by the

applicant.

In reply, it is submitted that the applicant has not come

before this Court with clean hands. She at her own will sought

transfer from Sikar to Ajmer. While denying the allegations

levelled against the non-applicant, it is submitted that the

prescription slips are of suggestive nature to avoid excessive

travelling. The prescription slips submitted by the applicant are

fabricated documents. The applicant's family is permanent

resident of Sikar City for last more than 40 years. The applicant

was born in Sikar and studied in Sikar. Her grand-parents are

having self built palatial house. The applicant also worked in

BRKG Bank, Sikar from November, 2014 to October, 2020 without

any fear from the non-applicant or his parents. It is also averred

that the principle of convenience of Fora should not be left at the

will of the parties. The interest of justice has to be paramount

and unnecessary burden should not be put on husband to facilitate

estranged wife. On these premises, the non-applicant-husband

prayed to dismiss the transfer application filed by the applicant-

wife.

The rejoinder to the reply has been filed by the applicant

denying the allegations made by the husband in his reply. In the

rejoinder, it is stated that the applicant and her family members

(4 of 6) [CTA-9/2021]

are permanent residents of Village Nathasar, District Jhunjhunu.

It is denied that grant-parents of the applicant are having palatial

house at Sikar. It is submitted that the applicant has been forced

to move out of her matrimonial home situated at Sikar; she has

filed a complaint under Section 12 read with Sections 17, 18, 19,

20, 22 & 23 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence

Act, 2005 before the court of learned Judicial Magistrate No. 3,

Ajmer. She has also filed an application under Section 9 of the Act

of 1955 before the Family Court at Ajmer, which is pending for

adjudication. On these premises, the applicant has prayed for

allowing the transfer petition.

Learned counsel for the applicant has relied on the judgment

passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of "Shruti

Kaushal Bisht Vs. Kaushal R. Bisht" (Transfer Petition

(Civil) No. 1264 of 2019) decided on 06.11.2020.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

material on record.

Learned counsel for the applicant seeks transfer of divorce

petition pending at Family Court Sikar on the grounds narrated in

the pleadings. On the other hand, learned counsel for the non-

applicant submits that both the parties are native of Sikar. The

native place of the applicant, though, situated in District

Jhunjhunu is only 22 kms. far from Sikar. The witnesses of the

applicant also belong to Sikar. The proceedings under the

Domestic Violence Act and under Section 9 of the Act of 1955

were instituted afterwards. The application seeking transfer filed

without reasonable basis is liable to be dismissed.

Learned counsel for the non-applicant has relied on the

judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of "Krishna

(5 of 6) [CTA-9/2021]

Veni Nagam Vs. Harish Nagam reported in (2017) 4

Supreme Court Cases 150.

In the present case, it is not in dispute that the applicant is

posted as Manager Scale - II in the Head Office of Baroda

Rajasthan Kshetriya Gramin Bank, Ajmer and is residing in Ajmer.

It is also not in dispute that her native place is near Sikar but her

father was working in the National Textile Corporation, a Public

Sector Undertaking, at the time of her marriage. He was posted

at Burhanpur (M.P.) and now he is retired. It is not in dispute that

the applicant moved an application to the Head Office seeking

transfer from Sikar to Ajmer. She explained the circumstances

under which she took this decision. It is also not in dispute that

non-applicant has filed the petition under Section 13 of the Act of

1955 at Sikar in the month of July, 2020 seeking divorce from the

applicant on the grounds of cruelty, desertion etc. The applicant

in person is attending the court proceedings. As per prescription

slips submitted by the applicant, she is suffering from back ache

and has been advised to avoid excessive travelling. In the above

circumstances, great inconvenience will be caused to the applicant

in defending the divorce petition at Sikar, which is about 250 kms.

away from Ajmer.

The contention of the non-applicant that the applicant herself

was responsible for her posting at Ajmer is not acceptable. The

applicant in her application has narrated the circumstances under

which she had applied for transfer from Sikar to Ajmer. It is also

not in dispute that the applicant has also filed an application under

Section 9 of the Act of 1955 and also initiated the proceedings

under the Domestic Violence Act against the non-applicant at

Ajmer, which are pending for adjudication, in which the non-

                                                                                    (6 of 6)                  [CTA-9/2021]



                                   applicant   is     required    to    come       at    Ajmer        and   defend   the

                                   proceedings.       It is also not in dispute that at present, the non-

                                   applicant is employed at Jaipur in a private company.                             The

distance between Jaipur to Ajmer is about 150 kms. only,

whereas, the distance between Ajmer to Sikar is about 250 kms.

Comparing the distance between the above places, this Court is of

the opinion that no inconvenience will be caused to the non-

applicant-husband if he attends the court proceedings at Ajmer

instead of Sikar.

Resultantly, the present transfer petition is allowed. The

case bearing CIS No. 138/2020 titled as "Sunil Kumar Vs. Neha

Singh" pending in the Family Court, Sikar is ordered to be

transferred to the Family Court, Ajmer.

Let the parties may appear before the Family Court, Ajmer

on 06.09.2021 and thereafter, the Family Court, Ajmer would