High CourtsSingle Bench

Priya Gupta (Saha) vs Vinod Kumar Gupta

Calcutta High Court · Decided on 9 January 2020 · Citation: (2020) 01 CAL CK 0269

HON’BLE JUDGES
Bibek Chaudhuri, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Civil Procedure, 1908 — Section 24 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 34, 323, 498A · Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 125 · Protection Of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005 — Section 12
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Civil Order/Misc.Cas (CO) No. 3611 Of 2019
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

20 paragraphs · 396 words

Bibek Chaudhuri, J

Affidavit of service filed by the petitioner be kept with the record.

It is ascertained from postal track record that the notice of the instant proceeding under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure was duly served

upon the opposite party but he has not turned up.

Under such circumstances, the application under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure is taken up for hearing ex parte.

The wife/petitioner has prayed for transfer of Matrimonial Suit No.797 of 2019 from the 2nd Court of learned Additional District Judge at

Barrackpore to the Court of the learned District Judge at Asansol in the district of Paschim Bardhaman mainly on the ground that three other

proceedings, one under Section 498A/323/34 of the Indian Penal Code, another under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and third one

under Section 12 read with other cognate provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act are pending before Asansol Court. In

two of the proceedings the opposite party has appeared and has been contesting. Therefore, the instant suit should also be transferred to the Court of

competent jurisdiction at Asansol. It is also pleaded by the petitioner that the distance between the paternal home of the petitioner and Barrackpore is

about 193 kilometres in one way. Therefore, the petitioner will have to travel a distance of about 400 kilometres in both ways in order to contest the

matrimonial suit at Barrackpore. So, is the prayer for transfer of the said suit.

In Tejalben versus Mihirbhai Bharalbhai Kothari reported in 2016 (3) SCC 69 the Hon’ble Supreme Court was pleased to transfer a matrimonial

suit at Jamnagar, Gujarat on the ground that other proceedings between the parties were pending in Jamnagar and there is no reason as to why the

suit for divorce shall not be transferred to Jamnagar. The same principle is applicable in the instant case. Therefore, the application under Section 24

of the Code of Civil Procedure deserves favourable consideration by this Court.

Under such circumstances, the application under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure is allowed, however, without costs.

Let a copy of this order be sent to both the Courts below for information and compliance.

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the learned advocates for the parties on usual undertakings.