Pallavi Rawat vs Akhilesh Rawat

Vipin Sanghi, CJ

Despite service, none appears for the respondent.

The applicant has preferred the present application under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure to transfer the Suit No.96 of 2022, “Akhilesh Rawat vs. Pallavi”, filed by the respondent- husband, under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, from the Court of learned Judge, Family Court, Tehri, District Tehri Garhwal to the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Dehradun.

The applicant is the wife of the respondent. It appears that on account of matrimonial dispute, they are not living together. While the applicant is residing at Dehradun, the respondent is residing in District Tehri Garhwal. The respondent has instituted the aforesaid Suit under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act to seek restitution of conjugal rights. The parties have a minor child, who is ten years of age now, and is residing with the applicant. The applicant states that she is unemployed. The child is studying at Doon Blossoms School, Dehradun. I am informed that the travel time between Dehradun to Tehri Garhwal, where the Court is located, is about three hours.

Learned counsel submits that the applicant has also instituted proceedings under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for maintenance before the Family Court, Dehradun.

In these circumstances, I am inclined to allow the present application. The respondent has not appeared to disclose any valid ground for opposing the same.

Accordingly, I direct transfer of Suit No.96 of 2022, “Akhilesh Rawat vs. Pallavi”, filed under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, from the Court of learned Family Judge, Family Court, Tehri, District Tehri Garhwal to the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Dehradun.

The petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of.