Nikita Sugandhi vs Nandkishor

Pavan Kumar Dwivedi, J

The present application has been filed by the wife under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure for transfer of proceedings in case RCSHM 10/2023 from the court of 2nd Additional District Judge, Sendhwa, District-Barwani to Family Court, District-Khargone.

It has been stated in the application that the applicant and respondent solemnized marriage on 30.11.2020 as per Hindu rites and customs at Mahalaxmi Mandir, Unn, District-Khargone. Out of their wedlock, one female child was born, however, she died later on. As there was some disputes between the applicant and respondent, they started living separately. The applicant has stated that the applicant is residing at her maternal house at District-Khargone and the respondent is living at Sendhwa. The respondent has instituted proceedings under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 seeking divorce from the applicant which is registered as RCSHM 10/2023.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that there is a distance of about 70 kms. between the place where case is filed i.e. Sendhwa and the place where the applicant resids i.e. Khandwa and it takes 2-3 hours for travelling one way. The applicant is entirely dependent on public transport and there is no properly reliable return transportation available from Sendhwa to Khargone. It has also been stated that the applicant is required to travel alone and because there is some tribal area and forest region during way from Sendhwa to Khargone and there is serious risk which causes grave mentally stress to the applicant. It has also been stated that the applicant is suffering from severe mental trauma and her mother is suffering from various ailments. Thus, it has been argued that it is highly inconvenient for the applicant for attending court proceedings at Sendhwa, thus, transfer of proceedings has been requested.

Heard the learned counsel for the applicant on admission.

The distance between two places is only 70 kms and inconvenience is the only ground which has been raised. As regards the issue of mental trauma, no document for substantiating such pleading has been placed on record. As regards the ailment of mother, from the prescription placed on record it is apparent that she is suffering from irregular blood pressure for which medication has been advised. As such, the only substantial ground is inconvenience. However, looking to the distance of 70 kms. this Court is not of the view that it causes severe inconvenience to the applicant particularly considering the fact that this application has been filed only in the year 2026 the divorce petition was filed in the year 2023, thus, after about 3 years of its filing this Court is not intending to transfer the proceedings.

This Court has also taken into account the fact that it is not that the applicant is required to attend the court proceeding on each and every date by remaining physically present before the Court. She can always move an application for appearing through video conferencing. As regards financial distress, she can always move appropriate application before the concerned court for litigation expenses and this Court is confident that if any such applications are filed then the same shall be adverted to in their proper perspective and in accordance with law.

In the facts of the present case and considering long pendency of the divorce proceedings since 2023 at this stage this Court is not of the view that the grounds for transfer of case is made out. In the facts of the present case, the inconvenience of wife is not such that would outweight other circumstances of the case as mentioned herein above i.e. long pendency, short distance and no substantiation of mental trauma, thus, admission is declined, consequently, transfer application is dismissed.