The Court has allowed the transfer of two cases—RCS No. 6/2023, concerning the restitution of conjugal rights, and CMAP No. 52/2023, regarding the permanent custody of a minor child—from the Civil and Criminal Court in Mapusa, Goa, to the Family Court in Bandra, Mumbai. The decision highlights the Court's emphasis on the wife's convenience and the welfare of the minor child.

1. Introduction

• The Applicant sought the transfer of RCS No. 6/2023 and CMAP No. 52/2023 from Goa to Mumbai.
• RCS No. 6/2023 concerns the restitution of conjugal rights, and CMAP No. 52/2023 seeks permanent custody of a two-and-a-half-year-old child.

2. Arguments by the Applicant

• The Applicant, represented by Ms. Punjani, argued that traveling from Mumbai to Goa with her minor child and elderly parents would cause significant hardship.
• Citing the case of Irene Blanch Khera vs. Glenn John Vijay, it was asserted that the High Court, as a common court for Maharashtra and Goa, has jurisdiction to decide the transfer.

3. Respondent's Opposition

• Mr. Kotwala, representing the Respondent, opposed the transfer, stating that the Applicant had already participated in proceedings in Goa and had access to legal aid there.
• The Respondent argued that transferring the case to Mumbai would burden him with bringing witnesses from Goa to Mumbai.

4. Court's Analysis

• The Court considered the economic conditions, social status, and the standard of life of both parties, focusing on the Applicant's convenience.
• The Respondent's arguments were found to lack merit, particularly given the Applicant's hardships.

5. Conclusion

• The Court ruled in favor of the Applicant, transferring the cases to the Family Court in Mumbai.
• The decision reinforces the principle that the wife's convenience and the child's welfare are paramount in matrimonial matters.

6. Order

• The cases, RCS No. 6/2023 and CMAP No. 52/2023, are ordered to be transferred from the Mapusa Court in Goa to the Family Court in Mumbai.