Poornima vs Ramakrishna Muddurangappa

B. Veerappa, J.—The wife field the above Civil Petition under Section 24 of Code of Civil Procedure, seeking to transfer M.C. No. 54/2014 pending on the file of Family Court at Raichur to the Civil Judge &JMFC Court, Bilagi.

It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner and respondent were married on 29.12.2012 as per the Hindu rights and customs. Thereafter, the petitioner joined the respondent to lead marital life. But unfortunately, respondent and his family members including the parents and sisters of respondent started harassing the petitioner alleging that she has not brought dowry and did not allow her to lead marital life with her husband. The respondent was also a party to their acts. It is further alleged that the petitioner lived in the house of the respondent tolerating all humiliations and physical assaults with the hope everything will fall in line and the respondent will lead marital life with her. When the harassment of the respondent and his family members crossed the limits of tolerance, the petitioner sought for interference of her parents and elders to advise the respondent and his family members, but all the attempts of the parents and elders of petitioner''s family went in vain. Inspite of harassment, the petitioner continued to live with the respondent, but in the month of April 2013 the respondent drove out the petitioner from his house asking the petitioner to bring more dowry from her parental house and sent her to her parents house at Bilagi wherein she is now residing Even after the petitioner was staying with her parents at Bilagi, the respondent along with his family members visited the parents house of the petitioner and started demanding the dowry. Inspite of all efforts, the respondent did not take the petitioner back to his house and on the contrary on 23.2.2014 the mother of the respondent visited the house of the petitioner and threatened the petitioner with dire consequences if she did not bring dowry. Thus the petitioner was constrained to file a petition in Crl. Misc. 41/2014 on the file of the Civil Judge (Sr. Dn) and JMFC, Bilagi, under Section 125 of Code of Civil Procedure, seeking for maintenance and she also filed criminal complaint against respondent and his family members alleging the commission of offences under the provisions of Domestic Violence Act and the same is registered as P.C. No. 2/2014 pending on the file of learned Civil Judge and JMFC, Bilagi. The petitioner further contended that the respondent-husband after attending the Court at Bilagi, has filed a petition under Section 10(1)(a) and (b) of the Hindu Marriage Act before the Family Court, Raichur, for judicial separation. Subsequently, the respondent withdrew the said case and filed another petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, seeking for restitution of conjugal rights in M.C. No. 54/2014 before the very same Court in order to harass the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner having not capable of attending the Court at Raichur as she has no means of income and is living at the mercy of her parents, has sought to transfer of the petition filed by the respondent from Raichur to Bilagi.

The respondent has not filed any objections to the civil petition.

I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties to the lis.

Sri. Santosh B. Mane, learned Counsel for the petitioner, reiterating the averments made in the petition contended that the petitioner has been neglected by the respondent by not providing basic necessities for her livelihood and was forced to file maintenance petition against the respondent. Thereafter, as a counterblast the respondent has filed the petition for restitution of conjugal rights in M.C. 54/2014 at Raichur only to harass and torture the petitioner. The petitioner has no financial support to meet the litigation and traveling expenses and she cannot travel alone from Bilagi to Raichur, which is about 250 Kms away from Bilagi, to contest the matter at Raichur and also there is serious threat to her safety if she go to Raichur and therefore, it is appropriate for transfer M.C. 54/2014 pending on the file of the Family Court at Raichur to the Civil Judge (Sr. Dn), at Bilagi, where she is having protection of the elders of her family members.

Shri. Anand R. Kolli, learned Counsel for respondent has opposed the transfer and sought to dismiss the petition.

I have given my thoughtful consideration to the arguments advanced by the learned Counsel on both sides and perused the entire material on record.

It is not in dispute that the marriage between the petitioner and the respondent was solemnized on 29.12.2012 at Raichur. It is also not in dispute that the petitioner filed Crl. Misc. 41/2014 on the file of the Civil Judge (Sr. Dn) at Bilagi and the same is pending and respondent-husband is attending the proceedings in the said case on every date of hearing. It is also not in dispute that the petitioner filed P.C. 2/2014 under the provisions of Domestic Violence Act and the same is pending before the Civil Judge and JMFC, Bilagi. The respondent after appearing before the Court at Bilagi has filed M.C. No. 54/2014 under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act seeking for restitution of conjugal rights before the Family Court, at Raichur, to harass the petitioner. The petitioner alleges that there is threat to her life from the respondent if she go to Raichur to attend the case and she cannot travel without the company of elderly person but due to poor financial condition she cannot afford to meet the litigation and traveling expenses. It is also stated that the petitioner after being deserted by her husband and coming back to her parents house at Bilagi, is now pursuing her studies in the best interest of her future career and she cannot frequently travel to Raichur to attend the case without attending her classes at Bilagi College. Therefore she has prayed to transfer of M.C. 54/2014 from Raichur to Bilagi.

Taking into consideration the young age of the petitioner and surrounding circumstances under which she was driven out from her matrimonial house at Raichur to her parents house at Bilagi, and also taking into consideration the averments made in the petition filed under Section 24 of Code of Civil Procedure, that she cannot alone travel from Bilagi to Raichur to attend the case when there is serious threat to her life from respondent and his family members at Raichur, and also in view of the dictum of this Court in the case of Seema alias Preeti Vs. Pramod Chandrakant Vernekar, (2004) 4 KarLJ 572 , wherein this Court has held that, while considering the application for transfer of matrimonial proceedings, the convenience of the wife has to be looked into as laid down by the 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 , this Court is of the view that it is fit case to allow the civil petition.

Accordingly, the civil petition is allowed. The proceedings in M.C. 54/14 pending on the file of Family Court at Raichur is ordered to be transfer to the Civil Judge (Sr. Dn) and JMFC, Bilagi. The learned Civil Judge (Sr. Dn) &JMFC, Bilagi, is directed to consider the case on merits and dispose of the same in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible.