Rajasthan High Court
Monika Goyal W/O Shri Vanchhit ... vs Shri Vanchhit Goyal S/O Dr. ... on 30 November, 2021
Bench: Chandra Kumar Songara
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Transfer Application No. 84/2020
Monika Goyal W/o Shri Vanchhit Goyal D/o Shri Mukesh Kumar
Singhal, resident of Girraj Colony, Police Station Nihalganj, District
Dholpur (Raj.)
----Petitioner
Versus
Shri Vanchhit Goyal S/o Dr. Ramlakhan Goyal, at present resident of
Flat No.205, Ashish Heights, Near Mahatma Gandhi Hospital, Sitapura,
Jaipur (Raj.)
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anil Jain, Advocate with
Mr. Dushyant Jain, Advocate
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Harsh Vardhan Sharma, Advocate
through video-conferencing.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA KUMAR SONGARA
Order
Date of order :::: 30 th November, 2021
***
By the Court :
Instant transfer application under Section 24 of the Code of
Civil Procedure, 1908 has been preferred on behalf of the petitioner-
wife seeking transfer of Civil Miscellaneous (H.M.A.) Case bearing
No.35/2020 titled as Vanchhit Goyal Vs. Smt. Monika Goyal, filed under
Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as
'the Act of 1955') by the respondent-husband from the Family Court,
No.2, Jaipur to the Family Court, Dholpur.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner-wife submits
that the petitioner-wife has filed the application under Section 125 of
Cr.P.C. for maintenance as well as application under Section 9 of the Act
of 1955 for restitution of her conjugal rights, before the learned Family
(2 of 4) [CTA-84/2020]
Court, Dholpur, which are still pending for its adjudication. Counsel
further submits that the respondent-husband had also filed a petition
under Section 13 of the Act of 1955 against the petitioner-wife before
the learned Family Court, No.2, Jaipur bearing Civil Miscellaneous Case
(H.M.A.) No.35/2020 titled as Vanchhit Goyal Vs. Smt. Monika Goyal,
with an ulterior motive to harass and humiliate her. Counsel contends
that the petitioner is presently living in Dholpur at her parental house
and having a minor child, hence, it is not possible for her to travel to
Jaipur on each and every date of hearing before the learned Family
Court, Jaipur. Lastly, counsel prays that the pending Case bearing
No.35/2020 may be transferred from the learned Family Court, No.2,
Jaipur to Family Court, Dholpur.
In support of his submissions, learned counsel appearing for
the petitioner-wife, has placed reliance upon the judgment of the
Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Vaishali Shridhar Jagtap
Vs.Shridhar Vishwanath Jagtap, reported in (2016) 14 SCC 356.
The transfer application has strongly been contested by the
learned counsel appearing for the respondent-husband and it has been
contended on his behalf that the respondent has never neglected to
maintain the petitioner, he has neither harassed nor treated her with
cruelty and never raised any demand of dowry. It is further contended
that the petitioner had filed a false case against the respondent and his
family members under Section 498-A of I.P.C. Counsel has also
contended that the petitioner is an educated lady and is living with her
family having male members, whereas the respondent is the only son of
his parents and is working in Jaipur, hence, it would be difficult for him
to attend the Court where the petitioner wants the case to be
transferred. Lastly, counsel has prayed that the petitioner had filed the
present application without having any reason or rhyme to transfer the
(3 of 4) [CTA-84/2020]
H.M.A. Case from the Family Court, No.2, Jaipur to the Family Court,
Dholpur. Hence, the transfer application may kindly be dismissed.
I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel
appearing for the parties and perused the material made available on
record.
In the case of Vaishali Shridhar Jagtap (Supra), Hon'ble
Apex Court, has held as under :-
"5. Admittedly, the distance between Mumbai and Barshi is
around 400 kilometres. Four cases between the parties are
pending at Barshi. Apparently, the comparative hardship is
more to the appellant-wife. This aspect of the matter,
unfortunately, the High Court has missed to take note of."
It is a well settled legal position that while going into the
merits of a transfer application, the Courts are required to give more
weightage and consideration to the convenience of the female litigants,
and transfer of legal proceedings from one Court to another should
ordinarily be allowed taking into consideration their convenience and
the Courts should desist from putting female litigants under undue
hardships. In such type of matters, the convenience of the wife is to be
preferred over the convenience of the husband.
Admittedly, the petitioner is presently residing in Dholpur at
her parental home and she is having a minor child, it is not possible for
her to travel to Jaipur on each and every date of hearing before the
Family Court, Jaipur.
In view of above discussion, the present transfer application
filed by the petitioner-wife is allowed and the Civil Miscellaneous
(H.M.A.) Case No.35/2020 titled as Vanchhit Goyal Vs. Smt. Monika
Goyal pending before the Family Court, No.2, Jaipur is ordered to be
transferred to the Family Court, Dholpur
(4 of 4) [CTA-84/2020]
The parties shall appear before the Family Court, Dholpur
on 21.12.2021.
The Family Court, No.2, Jaipur is directed to remit the
record of the Civil Miscellaneous (H.M.A.) Case No.35/2020 titled as
Vanchhit Goyal Vs. Smt. Monika Goyal, to the Family Court, Dholpur
forthwith.
Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
(CHANDRA KUMAR SONGARA),J.
ASHOK/9
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
