Supreme Court Dismisses Transfer Petition in Divorce Case — Upholds Advance Stage of Proceedings. The court found that the divorce petition was at an advanced stage and the respondent was willing to cover transportation costs for the petitioner.

  • 0
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The Supreme Court of India dealt with a transfer petition filed by the petitioner-wife, Abhilasha Gupta, seeking to transfer her divorce petition from the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Susner, Madhya Pradesh, to the Family Court at Kota, Rajasthan. The divorce petition was initiated by the respondent-husband, Harimohan Gupta, under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, and was at an advanced stage, with the husband's evidence already concluded. The court noted that the petitioner had not cited any witnesses other than herself and that the matter had been adjourned due to a stay order issued in the present proceedings. The respondent's counsel highlighted that the distance between the petitioner's residence and the Family Court was less than 200 kilometers and offered to cover the transportation expenses for the petitioner to facilitate her appearance in court. The court, considering the advanced stage of the divorce proceedings and the respondent's offer, declined to allow the transfer of the petition. Instead, it directed the respondent to pay the petitioner a sum of Rs. 4,000 for transportation charges for each hearing date. The transfer petition was disposed of with these orders, and the interim order dated 20.07.2021 was vacated.

Headnote

A) Family Law - Transfer of Divorce Petition - Jurisdiction and Convenience - Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, Section 13(1)(ia) - The court considered the advanced stage of the divorce proceedings and the willingness of the respondent to cover transportation costs for the petitioner to appear in court. The court ultimately decided against the transfer of the petition, emphasizing the need for expeditious proceedings (Paras 1-3).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the transfer of the divorce petition from Madhya Pradesh to Rajasthan should be allowed.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Supreme Court dismissed the transfer petition, directing the respondent to pay Rs. 4,000 for transportation charges for each hearing date.

Law Points

  • Transfer of petition
  • Hindu Marriage Act
  • 1955
  • transportation charges
  • jurisdiction
  • divorce proceedings
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2021 LawText (SC) (09) 232

Transfer Petition(s)(Civil) No. 1027/2021

2021-09-24

Hima Kohli

Ranu Purohit

Abhilasha Gupta

Harimohan Gupta

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

Nature of Litigation

Transfer petition for divorce proceedings

Remedy Sought

Transfer of divorce petition to Family Court at Kota, Rajasthan

Filing Reason

Petitioner-wife sought transfer due to convenience

Previous Decisions

Divorce petition was at an advanced stage with evidence concluded

Issues

Transfer of divorce petition Transportation charges for court appearance

Submissions/Arguments

Respondent's counsel argued against the transfer due to advanced stage of proceedings and offered to pay transportation costs. Petitioner sought transfer for convenience.

Ratio Decidendi

The court emphasized the importance of maintaining the progress of ongoing divorce proceedings and the practicality of transportation arrangements over the transfer of jurisdiction.

Judgment Excerpts

The present petition has been filed by the petitioner-wife praying inter alia for transfer of a petition for divorce filed by the respondent-husband. The court is not inclined to allow the present petition. The transfer petition is disposed of with the aforesaid orders.

Procedural History

The petitioner filed a transfer petition; the respondent filed a counter affidavit; the matter was last listed on 06.08.2021.

Acts & Sections

  • Hindu Marriage Act, 1955: Section 13(1)(ia)
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Letters Patent Appeals in MHADA Eviction Case — Upholds Concurrent Findings of Fact. Appellant's claim for tenancy rights rejected as he failed to prove lawful possession under Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Ac...
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Reviews Mandatory Three-Year Bar Practice Requirement for Civil Judge (Junior Division) Appointment. Court grants permission to file review petition and examines whether period for higher legal education should count toward practice req...