Supreme Court Allows Transfer of Family Court Proceedings Due to Absence of Respondent. Transfer of Petition Justified as Respondent Did Not Oppose Despite Awareness of Proceedings.

  • 0
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The Supreme Court of India dealt with a transfer petition filed by the petitioner-wife, Shakun Srivastava, seeking the transfer of a petition filed under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1956 by the respondent-husband, Prem Prakash Srivastava, from the Family Court in Gorakhpur, Uttar Pradesh to the Family Court in Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh. The court noted that notice was issued on 14.11.2018, and the proceedings in the original petition were stayed. The respondent was served as recorded on 06.01.2020, but there was no appearance on his behalf during subsequent hearings on 04.06.2020 and 18.06.2020. The court observed that the respondent had not opposed the transfer petition despite being aware of it through related proceedings under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 initiated by the petitioner. Considering these circumstances, the court concluded that the transfer request was justified. Consequently, the court ordered the transfer of the pending petition H.M.A. No.493 of 2018 to the Family Court in Bhopal and directed the Gorakhpur court to send the entire record immediately. The transferee court was instructed to expedite the case and resolve it by 31.12.2022. The transfer petition was allowed.

Headnote

A) Family Law - Transfer of Proceedings - Justification for Transfer - Hindu Marriage Act, 1956, Section 9 - The petitioner sought transfer of proceedings from Gorakhpur to Bhopal due to the absence of the respondent and the need for convenience. The court found the request justified and allowed the transfer, directing the Gorakhpur court to transmit records immediately (Paras 1-2).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the transfer of the petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1956 from Gorakhpur to Bhopal is justified.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Supreme Court allowed the transfer of the petition H.M.A. No.493 of 2018 from Gorakhpur to Bhopal, directing the Gorakhpur court to transmit records immediately and the Bhopal court to decide the case expeditiously by 31.12.2022.

Law Points

  • Transfer of proceedings
  • Family Court jurisdiction
  • Hindu Marriage Act
  • 1956
  • Code of Criminal Procedure
  • 1973
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2021 LawText (SC) (10) 129

Transfer Petition (Civil) No.1840 of 2018

2021-10-04

S. Ravindra Bhat

Shakun Srivastava

Prem Prakash Srivastava

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

Nature of Litigation

Transfer petition under Hindu Marriage Act

Remedy Sought

Transfer of petition from Gorakhpur to Bhopal

Previous Decisions

Notice issued and proceedings stayed

Issues

Justification for transfer of proceedings Absence of respondent's opposition

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner sought transfer due to convenience Respondent did not appear or oppose

Ratio Decidendi

The court emphasized the importance of convenience and the absence of opposition from the respondent in justifying the transfer of proceedings.

Judgment Excerpts

The request for transfer of proceedings from the Family Court, Gorakhpur, Uttar Pradesh to the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh, is justified. The Family Court at Gorakhpur is directed to transmit the entire record to the transferee Court immediately.

Procedural History

Transfer petition filed, notice issued, proceedings stayed, respondent served, no appearance by respondent.

Acts & Sections

  • Hindu Marriage Act, 1956: Section 9
  • Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: Section 125
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Upholds State Government's Integration of Services under State Reorganisation Act — Validity of Seniority and Promotion Rules Affirmed.
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Upholds Authority of Delegated Appointing Authority in Disciplinary Proceedings — Delegation of Powers Clarified.