Kashibai vs Somappa

B. Veerappa, J.—The wife filed this transfer petition under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, to transfer MC No. 9/2015 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Muddebihal to the Family Court, Belagavi, for proper adjudication.

It is the case of the petitioner that she is the legally wedded wife of respondent and their marriage took place on 21.05.2010, as per Hindu customs, in front of the house of the respondent at Bantanur village, Muddebihal Taluk. After the marriage the petitioner joined the respondent to lead married life at Bantanur. Out of the wedlock, the petitioner gave birth to a female child, namely Kalpana, on 18.08.2011 and thereafter, the petitioner joined the respondent along with her daughter. The atmosphere in the house of the respondent was changed when the petitioner went to the house of respondent with a female child. Thereafter, the respondent and his family members started harassing the petitioner and started demanding dowry of Rs. 1,00,000/- from the father of the petitioner.

It is also contended that, in the month of February 2014, respondent and his family members assaulted the petitioner very badly and the respondent asked the parents of the petitioner to take her back; though the parents of the petitioner advised the respondent and his family members, they did not mend their ways and they sent the petitioner to her parents house, when she was pregnant. Thereafter, several attempts were made but the respondent refused to take her back.

On 28.02.2014, the petitioner filed a petition in Criminal Misc. No. 68/2014, under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for grant of maintenance before the Family Court, Belagavi and the same is pending adjudication. During the pendency of the said petition, she also gave birth to a male child, who is now aged about 1 month. In the interregnum, the respondent/husband also filed a petition in M.C. No. 9/2015 under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, for restitution of conjugal rights, in the Court of Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Muddebihal. Therefore, the petitioner is before this Court.

The notice issued by this Court to the respondent is served and unrepresented.

I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.

Sri. Santosh B. Rawoot, learned counsel for the petitioner, has contended that the petitioner is residing with her parents along with her female child of 2 1/2 years and one month old male child. Therefore, she cannot attend the Matrimonial Case No. 09/2015 at Muddebihal, which is about 350 km from Belagavi and also contended that the petitioner/wife apprehends threat to her life, while attending the Court at Muddebihal. Therefore, he prays for allowing this Civil Petition.

The allegations made in this petition are not challenged, since the respondent is served and unrepresented.

I have given my thoughtful consideration to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the entire material on record.

The admitted facts are that the marriage between the parties was solemnised on 21.05.2010 and out of the wedlock, a female child and a male child were born--female child now aged about 2 1/2 years and male child about 1 month. There is no dispute that the distance between Muddebihal and Belagavi is about 350 km and the petitioner cannot attend the Matrimonial Case on every date of hearing at Muddebihal with small kids, as stated above, and there is a threat to her life from the respondent/husband. Further, she has no means to spend for her litigation expenses and travel expenses, taking into consideration the age of the small children and the young age of the petitioner, in my considered opinion, it is a fit case to transfer, as prayed for.

This Court, while considering the provisions of Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, in the case of Seema alias Preeti Vs. Pramod Chandrakant Vernekar, (2004) 4 KarLJ 572 , relying upon the dictum of the Hon''ble Supreme Court in the case of Sumita Singh Vs. Kumar Sanjay and Another, AIR 2002 SC 396 : (2001) 10 SCC 41 : (2001) AIRSCW 5193 : (2001) 5 Supreme 667 , has held that the convenience of the wife must be looked into while passing orders under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

In view of the reasons stated above, this Civil Petition is allowed.

M.C. No. 09/2015 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Muddebihal, is ordered to be transferred to the Family Court, Belagavi, for adjudication between the parties, in accordance with law.