Case Note & Summary
The applicant husband filed a Miscellaneous Civil Application seeking transfer of a complaint filed by the respondent wife under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (DV Act) pending before the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 4th Court at Girgaon, Mumbai, to the Family Court at Bandra, Mumbai, and to club it with the divorce petition (Marriage Petition No. A-2787 of 2023) filed by the husband. The husband contended that the wife filed the DV complaint as a counterblast to his divorce petition and that both proceedings involve common issues. The wife opposed the transfer, arguing that the DV Act gives her a statutory right to choose the forum and that the proceedings were at an advanced stage. She relied on the decision in Anuraag Agarwal v. Poonam Agarwal, which held that the wife's right to choose forum under the DV Act cannot be taken away by Section 24 CPC. The court, however, distinguished that case and relied on the Supreme Court decision in N.C.V. Aishwarya v. A.S. Saravana Karthik Sha, which held that in matrimonial matters, when two or more proceedings raise common questions of fact and law and decisions are interdependent, they should be tried together to avoid multiplicity and conflict of decisions. The court noted that both courts are in Mumbai (Girgaon and Bandra), so the wife's convenience is not adversely affected. The court allowed the application, transferring the DV Act proceedings to the Family Court at Bandra and directing that both proceedings be heard together.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Transfer of Proceedings - Section 24 CPC - Clubbing of Matrimonial Proceedings - The court considered transfer of DV Act complaint from Magistrate to Family Court to be tried with divorce petition - Held that when two or more proceedings raise common questions of fact and law and decisions are interdependent, they should be tried together to avoid multiplicity and conflict of decisions, relying on N.C.V. Aishwarya v. A.S. Saravana Karthik Sha (Paras 8-12).
B) Domestic Violence Act - Forum Choice - Right to Choose Forum - The wife's statutory right to choose forum under the DV Act is not absolute and can be overridden by transfer under Section 24 CPC when ends of justice demand clubbing of proceedings - Held that transfer does not take away the wife's right but ensures efficient adjudication (Paras 7-8).
C) Matrimonial Law - Transfer - Convenience of Wife - While generally the wife's convenience is paramount in transfer matters, where both courts are in the same city (Mumbai), proximity and time factors negate inconvenience - Held that the principle of wife's convenience is not applicable when both courts are within the same city (Paras 8-9).
Issue of Consideration
Whether proceedings under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 pending before the Magistrate should be transferred to the Family Court to be tried together with the divorce petition, and whether the wife's right to choose forum under the DV Act is absolute.
Final Decision
The Miscellaneous Civil Application is allowed. The proceedings in C.C. No.400054/DV/2023 pending before the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 4th Court at Girgaon, Mumbai are transferred to the Family Court at Bandra, Mumbai. The Family Court is directed to club the DV proceedings with Marriage Petition No. A-2787 of 2023 and hear them together.
Law Points
- Transfer of proceedings under Section 24 CPC
- Clubbing of matrimonial proceedings
- Convenience of wife in transfer matters
- Avoidance of multiplicity of proceedings
Case Details
2024 LawText (BOM) (9) 46
Miscellaneous Civil Application No.58 of 2024
Mr. Ashutosh Kulkarni a/w. Mr. Gaurav Sharma and Ms. Rajnni Kuttyy i./by Avyuktaa Legal for Applicant; Mr. Anoshak Davar a/w. Mr. Raghavendra Mehrotra and Ms. Samrudhi Gholap i./by Lawkhart Legal for Respondent No.1; Mr. Uttam Rane for Respondent No.2
Krupali Khanjan Jasani and Anr.
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Miscellaneous Civil Application seeking transfer of proceedings under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 from the Magistrate Court to the Family Court and clubbing with divorce petition.
Remedy Sought
Transfer of C.C. No.400054/DV/2023 from the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 4th Court at Girgaon, Mumbai to the Family Court at Bandra, Mumbai and direction to club both proceedings together.
Filing Reason
The husband filed the application to avoid multiplicity of proceedings and conflict of decisions, as both the DV complaint and the divorce petition involve common issues between the same parties.
Previous Decisions
The wife had filed a complaint under the DV Act on 24.11.2023, after the husband filed a divorce petition on 30.10.2023 and a suit by the husband's mother on 08.11.2023. The wife had made a statement on 23.11.2023 before the Bombay City Civil Court that she would not enter the suit flat, but later withdrew it on 11.12.2023.
Issues
Whether the proceedings under the DV Act should be transferred to the Family Court to be tried together with the divorce petition?
Whether the wife's right to choose forum under the DV Act is absolute and cannot be overridden by Section 24 CPC?
Submissions/Arguments
The husband argued that the DV complaint was filed as a counterblast to the divorce petition and that both proceedings involve common issues, warranting transfer and clubbing to avoid multiplicity and conflict of decisions.
The wife argued that the DV Act gives her a statutory right to choose the forum, which cannot be taken away by Section 24 CPC, and that the DV proceedings were at an advanced stage.
Ratio Decidendi
In matrimonial matters, when two or more proceedings between the same parties raise common questions of fact and law and the decisions are interdependent, it is desirable to try them together to avoid multiplicity of proceedings and conflict of decisions. The wife's right to choose forum under the DV Act is not absolute and can be overridden by the power of transfer under Section 24 CPC when ends of justice demand clubbing. The convenience of the wife, though generally a factor, is not decisive when both courts are in the same city.
Judgment Excerpts
The cardinal principle for exercise of power Under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure is that the ends of justice should demand the transfer of the suit, appeal or other proceeding.
When two or more proceedings are pending in different Courts between the same parties which raise common question of fact and law, and when the decisions in the cases are interdependent, it is desirable that they should be tried together by the same Judge so as to avoid multiplicity in trial of the same issues and conflict of decisions.
Procedural History
The husband filed Marriage Petition No. A-2787 of 2023 in the Family Court at Bandra on 30.10.2023. The husband's mother filed a civil suit in the Bombay City Civil Court on 08.11.2023. The wife filed a complaint under the DV Act on 24.11.2023 before the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 4th Court at Girgaon, Mumbai. The husband filed the present Miscellaneous Civil Application on an unspecified date seeking transfer and clubbing of the DV proceedings with the divorce petition.
Acts & Sections
- Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005:
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908: Section 24
