Supreme Court Dismisses Transfer Petitions in Matrimonial Dispute Due to Lack of Exceptional Circumstances. Wife's request to transfer multiple pending cases from Solan to Delhi rejected as balance of convenience and hardship did not justify transfer.

  • 16
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The case involves a matrimonial dispute between the petitioner wife, Ankita Bhati, and the respondent husband, Dev Raj Singh Bhati. The wife filed two transfer petitions: Transfer Petition (Civil) No. 1770 of 2021 and Transfer Petition (Criminal) No. 659 of 2019, seeking to transfer multiple pending proceedings from courts in Solan, Himachal Pradesh to Delhi. The pending proceedings included a maintenance petition under Section 18 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956, a complaint under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, and a petition under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, all pending in Solan. The wife argued that she resides in Delhi and it is difficult for her to travel to Solan for hearings. The husband opposed the transfer, stating that he resides in Solan and that the cases were filed by the wife in Solan. The Supreme Court noted that the parties had attempted mediation but it failed. The Court observed that the wife had herself filed the cases in Solan and that the husband also faced hardship if cases were transferred. The Court held that the balance of convenience and hardship did not favor the wife, and there were no exceptional circumstances warranting transfer. Consequently, both transfer petitions were dismissed. The Court directed the trial courts in Solan to expedite the proceedings and complete them within one year.

Headnote

A) Transfer of Proceedings - Matrimonial Disputes - Balance of Convenience - Transfer of multiple matrimonial proceedings from Solan to Delhi sought by wife - Court held that mere inconvenience to the wife is not sufficient to order transfer; the court must consider the balance of convenience and hardship to both parties - Held that in the absence of exceptional circumstances, transfer cannot be granted (Paras 1-7).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the transfer petitions filed by the wife seeking transfer of multiple matrimonial proceedings from Solan, Himachal Pradesh to Delhi should be allowed.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

Both transfer petitions are dismissed. The trial courts in Solan are directed to expedite the proceedings and complete them within one year.

Law Points

  • Transfer of proceedings
  • Matrimonial disputes
  • Balance of convenience
  • Hardship
  • Exceptional circumstances
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2023 INSC 643

Transfer Petition (Civil) No. 1770 of 2021 with Transfer Petition (Criminal) No. 659 of 2019

2023-01-01

Abhay S. Oka

2023 INSC 643

Ankita Bhati

Dev Raj Singh Bhati

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Transfer petitions in a matrimonial dispute seeking transfer of multiple pending proceedings from Solan, Himachal Pradesh to Delhi.

Remedy Sought

Wife sought transfer of maintenance petition under Section 18 of Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956, complaint under Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, and petition under Section 125 of CrPC from Solan to Delhi.

Filing Reason

Wife resides in Delhi and claimed difficulty in traveling to Solan for hearings.

Previous Decisions

Mediation between parties failed.

Issues

Whether the transfer petitions should be allowed considering the balance of convenience and hardship to both parties.

Submissions/Arguments

Wife argued that she resides in Delhi and it is difficult for her to travel to Solan for hearings. Husband opposed transfer stating he resides in Solan and the cases were filed by the wife in Solan.

Ratio Decidendi

In matrimonial disputes, transfer of proceedings should not be granted merely on the ground of inconvenience to one party; the court must consider the balance of convenience and hardship to both parties. Exceptional circumstances are required to justify transfer.

Judgment Excerpts

This is a usual case where a matrimonial dispute which resulted in multiple cases being filed by the parties. Though an effort was made to arrive at a mediated settlement, perhaps the parties have not seen the reason and therefore, the mediation has failed.

Procedural History

The wife filed Transfer Petition (Civil) No. 1770 of 2021 and Transfer Petition (Criminal) No. 659 of 2019 seeking transfer of multiple matrimonial proceedings from Solan to Delhi. The petitions were heard by the Supreme Court and dismissed.

Acts & Sections

  • Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956: 18
  • Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005:
  • Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: 125
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Dismisses Transfer Petitions in Matrimonial Dispute Due to Lack of Exceptional Circumstances. Wife's request to transfer multiple pending cases from Solan to Delhi rejected as balance of convenience and hardship did not justify transfer...
Related Judgement
High Court High Court Dismisses Employer's Writ Petition in Labour Dispute Over Dismissal Without Inquiry. Dismissal based on media reports without independent verification violates natural justice and MSRTC Discipline and Appeal Rules, justifying reinstatement...