Bombay High Court Allows Wife's Application for Transfer of Divorce Petition from Ahmednagar to Aurangabad on Grounds of Wife's Convenience and Hardship. The Court held that in matrimonial proceedings, the convenience of the wife is paramount and transfer is warranted to avoid hardship when the wife has no male escort and faces difficulty traveling alone.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: AURANGABAD In Favour of Accused
  • 2
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The applicant, Pramela Madhav Yeshwant, wife of the respondent Madhav Radhakishan Yeshwant, filed an application under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking transfer of Hindu Marriage Petition No. 131 of 2009 pending before the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Ahmednagar, to the Family Court at Aurangabad. The wife, aged 20 years and a household, contended that she resided in Aurangabad with her parents, while the husband, a Senior Lecturer, resided at Ahmednagar. She argued that she had no male escort to accompany her to Ahmednagar, which was about 200 kms away, and that traveling alone would cause her great hardship and danger. The husband opposed the transfer, claiming he was willing to bear travel expenses and that the wife could travel with her father. The Court, after hearing both sides, relied on precedents including Smt. Nanda Kishori v. S.B. Shivaprakash, AIR 1993 Karnataka 87, Anisha Sanjay Hinduja v. Sanjay Shrichand Hinduja, 2003 (Supp.) Bom.C.R.802, and Guda Vijayalakshmi v. Guda Ramchandra Sekhara Sastry. The Court held that in matrimonial matters, the convenience of the wife is of paramount importance and that the wife's difficulty in traveling alone and the distance involved justified transfer. The Court allowed the application, directing the transfer of the petition from Ahmednagar to Aurangabad, with the husband to bear the costs of the transfer.

Headnote

A) Transfer of Proceedings - Matrimonial Jurisdiction - Convenience of Wife - Section 24 CPC - Wife sought transfer of divorce petition from Ahmednagar to Aurangabad citing difficulty in traveling alone, lack of male escort, and distance of 200 kms - Court held that in matrimonial matters, convenience of wife is paramount and transfer was warranted to avoid hardship - Held that the petition was allowed (Paras 1-3).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether a divorce petition filed by the husband at Ahmednagar should be transferred to Aurangabad at the instance of the wife on grounds of her convenience and hardship.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

Application allowed. Hindu Marriage Petition No. 131 of 2009 pending before Civil Judge, Senior Division, Ahmednagar is transferred to Family Court at Aurangabad. Respondent to bear costs of transfer.

Law Points

  • Transfer of proceedings
  • matrimonial jurisdiction
  • convenience of wife
  • Section 24 of Code of Civil Procedure
  • 1908
  • hardship
  • distance
  • lack of male escort
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2010 LawText (BOM) (09) 8

Misc. Civil Application No. 15 of 2010

2010-09-30

S.S. Shinde

Mr. Santosh C. Bhosale for applicant, Mr. U.S. Malte for respondent

Pramela Madhav Yeshwant

Madhav Radhakishan Yeshwant

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

Nature of Litigation

Transfer application under Section 24 CPC in a matrimonial dispute

Remedy Sought

Transfer of Hindu Marriage Petition No. 131 of 2009 from Ahmednagar to Aurangabad

Filing Reason

Wife's difficulty in traveling alone from Aurangabad to Ahmednagar due to distance and lack of male escort

Previous Decisions

Hindu Marriage Petition No. 131 of 2009 pending before Civil Judge, Senior Division, Ahmednagar

Issues

Whether the divorce petition should be transferred from Ahmednagar to Aurangabad on grounds of wife's convenience and hardship

Submissions/Arguments

Applicant (wife): She resides in Aurangabad with parents, has no male escort, distance is 200 kms, traveling alone is dangerous and causes hardship. Respondent (husband): He is willing to bear travel expenses, wife can travel with her father.

Ratio Decidendi

In matrimonial matters, the convenience of the wife is of paramount importance. Transfer of proceedings is warranted to avoid hardship to the wife, especially when she has no male escort and faces difficulty traveling alone to a distant court.

Judgment Excerpts

Heard learned Counsel appearing for the applicant and learned Counsel appearing for nonapplicant/respondent. Learned Counsel appearing for applicant invited my attention to the grounds taken by the applicant in the application and also relied upon following judgments of High Courts as well as Supreme Court in the cases of Smt. Nanda Kishori V/s. S.B. Shivaprakash, AIR 1993 KARNATAKA 87, Anisha Sanjay Hinduja V/s. Sanjay Shrichand Hinduja, 2003 (Supp.) Bom.C.R.802 and Guda Vijayalakshmi V/s. Guda Ramchandra Sekhara Sastry.

Procedural History

The wife filed Misc. Civil Application No. 15 of 2010 under Section 24 CPC seeking transfer of Hindu Marriage Petition No. 131 of 2009 from Ahmednagar to Aurangabad. The application was heard and decided on 30.09.2010.

Acts & Sections

  • Code of Civil Procedure, 1908: Section 24
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Wife's Application for Transfer of Divorce Petition from Ahmednagar to Aurangabad on Grounds of Wife's Convenience and Hardship. The Court held that in matrimonial proceedings, the convenience of the wife is paramount and tra...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Petitioners' Challenge to Land Acquisition for Kukadi Project — Alternative Land Offer Not Considered Under Section 5-A of Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Court Held That Non-Consideration of Alternative Land Offer Does Not ...