Babita Kurrey vs Hemant Kumar Kurrey

core.xml

Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, J

The instant petition has been filed under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 by the petitioner/wife seeking transfer of Civil Suit No. A/170/2025 filed by the respondent/husband under Section 7 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 read with Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for restitution of conjugal rights, pending before the learned Family Court, Balodabazar, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.), to the learned Family Court, Mungeli (C.G.).

The petitioner and respondent are legally wedded Hindus and their marriage was solemnized according to Hindu rites and customs. After the marriage, the petitioner started residing at her matrimonial home with the respondent and his family members.

It is alleged that after some time of marriage, the respondent and his family members started harassing the petitioner in connection with demand of dowry and subjected her to ill- treatment and cruelty. Due to such conduct, the petitioner was compelled to leave her matrimonial home and started residing with her parents. It is further submitted that despite efforts made by the petitioner to resume matrimonial life, there was no change in the behaviour of the respondent.

Thereafter, the respondent filed an application under Section 7 of the Family Courts Act read with Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act before the learned Family Court, Balodabazar, which has been registered as Civil Suit No. A/170/2025.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is presently residing with her parents at Village Bhumiyapara, P.S. Fasterpur, Tahsil Mungeli, District Mungeli (C.G.). It is submitted that the distance between Mungeli and Balodabazar is about 120 kilometers and the petitioner, being a housewife and having no independent source of income, is facing considerable difficulty in attending the proceedings before the Family Court, Balodabazar on each and every date of hearing.

It is further submitted that the petitioner has also filed proceedings under Section 144 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 which has been registered as Misc. Criminal Case No. 141/2025 and the same is pending before the learned Family Court, Mungeli, wherein the petitioner is regularly appearing.

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent has opposed the prayer for transfer and submits that the petitioner has deliberately filed the present transfer petition only to harass the respondent. It is further submitted that in the event the case is transferred to the Family Court, Mungeli, the respondent may be permitted to participate in the proceedings through video conferencing.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

In the matter of N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs. A.S. Saravana Karthik (2022 SCC Online SC 1199) the Hon’ble Supreme Court has observed that generally it is wife’s convenience which must be looked at while considering transfer. The relevant portion of the aforesaid judgment is reproduced hereunder:-

"9. 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. In matrimonial matters, wherever Courts are called upon to consider the plea of transfer, the Courts have to take into consideration the economic soundness of both the parties, the social strata of the spouses and their behavioural pattern, their standard of life prior to the marriage and subsequent thereto and the circumstances of both the parties in eking out their livelihood and under whose protective umbrella they are seeking their sustenance to life. Given the prevailing socio-economic paradigm in the Indian society, generally, it is the wife's convenience which must be looked at while considering transfer.

10.Further, 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.”

Having regard to the submissions made and in view of the aforesaid principles and considering the fact that the petitioner is residing with her parents at Mungeli, has no independent source of income and the distance between Mungeli and Balodabazar is substantial, this Court is of the opinion that the balance of convenience lies in favour of the petitioner. Moreover, another proceeding between the parties is already pending before the Family Court, Mungeli.

So far as the submission of learned counsel for the respondent regarding appearance through video conferencing is concerned, it is observed that if the respondent makes any request before the learned Family Court, Mungeli seeking permission to appear through video conferencing, the concerned Court shall consider such request in accordance with law and may permit the respondent to participate in the proceedings through video conferencing.

Accordingly, the transfer petition is allowed. Civil Suit No. A/170/2025 pending before the learned Family Court, Balodabazar, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) is hereby transferred to the learned Family Court, Mungeli (C.G.) for its trial and disposal in accordance with law.

Both the parties are directed to appear before the learned Family Court, Mungeli on 15.04.2026.