Case Note & Summary
The matter arose from a matrimonial dispute between the applicant-husband and respondent-wife. The husband filed Miscellaneous Civil Application No. 367 of 2024 in the High Court of Judicature at Bombay under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking transfer of Domestic Violence Case No.62/DV/2024 from the Metropolitan Magistrate 71st Court, Bandra to the Family Court, Bandra, to be heard with Divorce Petition No.A-1250 of 2024 and Restitution Petition No.A-1815 of 2024. The wife had filed a divorce petition under Section 13(1)(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 before the Family Court, while the husband had filed a petition for restitution of conjugal rights, custody of the minor daughter Rhyah, and other reliefs. The wife also initiated proceedings under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, seeking protection orders, custody, compensation of Rs.20,00,00,000, and legal expenses. A comparative chart showed substantial overlap between the prayers in the DV case and the divorce petition, including custody of the child, residence restrictions, and compensation. The husband contended that a single forum would avoid conflicting findings, duplication, judicial delay, and unnecessary expense, and that continuing in two forums would compel parties to engage different advocates. The wife's counsel relied on Anurag Agarwal v Poonam Agarwal to resist transfer. The court noted that no reply was filed by the wife, mediation had failed on 4 April 2025, and the DV case was at the stage of filing evidence with the next hearing on 13 November 2025. The court applied the principles in N.C.V Aishwarya v Saravana Karthik Sha regarding Section 24 CPC, which require considering ends of justice, economic soundness, social strata, and wife's convenience. It distinguished Anurag Agarwal because in that case proceedings were at an advanced stage, unlike the present. The court found that the reliefs in the DV proceedings could be granted by the Family Court, that both courts were in close proximity, and that no prejudice would be caused to the wife given the social background of the parties. Accordingly, the court allowed the application, transferred DV Case No.62/DV/2024 to the Family Court, Bandra, directed the Family Court to issue notice preferably within three weeks, and disposed of the application. The order was pronounced on 19 August 2025.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Transfer of Proceedings - Section 24 CPC - Transfer of a domestic violence case from a Magistrate to a Family Court is permissible when two or more proceedings between the same parties raise common questions of fact and law and decisions are interdependent, to avoid multiplicity of trial and conflicting decisions - Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Section 24 - The applicant sought transfer of DV Case No.62/DV/2024 to the Family Court where divorce and restitution petitions were pending, claiming overlapping reliefs and common issues. The court found that evidence should be recorded before a single forum and that the Family Court matter could not be transferred to the Magistrate's Court. Held: The application for transfer was allowed under Section 24 CPC (Paras 4, 9, 11-12). B) Family Law - Overlapping Matrimonial and DV Reliefs - Family Court Can Grant DV Act Reliefs - Protection order, custody, and compensation under the DV Act overlap with divorce petition reliefs such as custody and residence restrictions - Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, Sections 18, 21, 22; Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, Section 13(1)(a) - A comparative chart showed that the prayers in the DV proceedings and divorce petition substantially overlapped, including custody of minor daughter Rhyah, residence restrictions, and compensation. The court observed that the reliefs sought in the DV proceedings could also be granted by the Family Court. Held: The DV proceedings were transferred to the Family Court to avoid inconsistent orders and duplication (Paras 3, 8-9). C) Family Law - Matrimonial Transfer Principles - Wife's Convenience and Socio-Economic Factors - While considering transfer in matrimonial matters, courts must examine economic soundness, social strata, behavioural pattern, and the wife's convenience; however, transfer may be granted when no prejudice is caused - Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Section 24 - The Supreme Court in N.C.V Aishwarya laid down that the cardinal principle is ends of justice, and generally the wife's convenience must be considered. Here both courts were in close proximity, the social background of the parties did not suggest inconvenience, and the wife would not be prejudiced. Held: The transfer did not cause prejudice to the respondent wife and was in the interest of justice (Paras 9, 11-12). D) Precedent - Distinguishing Facts - Advanced Stage of Proceedings - An earlier decision refusing transfer may be distinguished when the facts differ materially, such as the stage of pending proceedings - Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Section 24 - The respondent relied on Anurag Agarwal v Poonam Agarwal (2024:BHC-AS:26874), but the court distinguished that case because there the Magistrate's Court proceedings were already at an advanced stage, unlike the present matter where the DV case was at the stage of filing evidence with the next hearing after three months. Held: The precedent did not bar transfer on the present facts (Para 10). E) Domestic Violence - Reliefs Under Sections 18, 21, 22 - Transfer to Family Court for Consolidated Adjudication - A Family Court can adjudicate protection orders, custody, and compensation under the DV Act alongside divorce and restitution petitions - Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, Sections 18, 21, 22 - The DV case sought protection orders, custody orders, compensation of Rs.20,00,00,000, and legal expenses, all of which were interlinked with the divorce and restitution proceedings. The court held that transferring the DV case to the Family Court would serve the interest of justice and avoid conflicting findings. Held: The Miscellaneous Civil Application was allowed and the Family Court was directed to issue notice within three weeks and proceed expeditiously (Paras 3, 9, 13-14).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Domestic Violence Case No.62/DV/2024 pending before the Metropolitan Magistrate 71st Court, Bandra should be transferred to the Family Court, Bandra to be heard with Divorce Petition No.A-1250 of 2024 and Restitution Petition No.A-1815 of 2024 under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, considering overlapping reliefs, common issues, and the convenience of parties.
Final Decision
Miscellaneous Civil Application allowed; DV Case No.62/DV/2024 is transferred from Metropolitan Magistrate 71st Court, Bandra to Family Court, Bandra to be heard and decided along with Divorce Petition No.A-1250 of 2024 and Restitution Petition No.A-1815 of 2024. Family Court to issue notice within three weeks and proceed expeditiously.
Law Points
- Section 24 CPC transfer is warranted when two or more proceedings between same parties raise common questions of fact and law and decisions are interdependent
- to avoid multiplicity of trial and conflicting decisions
- in matrimonial matters
- courts must consider economic soundness
- social strata
- behavioural pattern
- and wife's convenience
- overlapping reliefs under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act
- 2005 and Hindu Marriage Act
- 1955 can be granted by Family Court
- Family Court matter cannot be transferred to Magistrate's Court
- hence DV proceedings should be transferred
- stage of proceedings is relevant for distinguishing precedents.
