High CourtsSingle Bench(2018) 03 JH CK 0087

RAKHEE SRIVASTAVA @ SINHA @ RAKHI SRIVASTAVA, WIFE OF BRIJENDRA @ BIJENDRA KUMAR SRIVASTAVA vs BIJENDRA KUMAR SRIVASTAVA @ BRIJENDRA @ BIJENDRA KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, SON OF SRI SURENDRA PRASAD LAL

Jharkhand High Court · Decided on 23 March 2018

HON’BLE JUDGES
AMITAV K. GUPTA, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Transfer Petition (Civil) No.59 of 2017

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

23 paragraphs · 484 words
1.

This transfer petition has been filed under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure for transfer of Matrimonial Suit No.378 of 2017 from the court

of the Principal Judge, Family Court, Jamshedpur to the court of the Principal Judge, Family Court, Ranchi.

2.

Learned counsel has submitted that the petitioner was compelled to reside in her parental house on account of the torture and cruelty perpetrated by

the opposite party. That she has filed a maintenance case under Section 125 Cr.P.C. being M 72 of 2017 and a Guardianship Case No.206 of 2017 in

the courts at Ranchi. That after institution of the said cases, notices were served on the opposite party and the opposite party, in order to avoid and

escape the liability to provide the maintenance and to create a defence has instituted the aforesaid matrimonial suit in the court of Principal Judge,

Family Court, at Jamshedpur. It is submitted by the learned counsel that the petitioner is facing great inconvenience and hardship in travelling from

Ranchi to Jamshedpur as she does not have any source of income either to meet the travel expenses or the funds for engaging a counsel to defend the

suit at Jamshedpur.Â

 On the above grounds, prayer has been made for transfer of the aforesaid case.

3.

Heard. On perusal of the record it is evident that despite valid service of notice the opposite party has not appeared. On 05.01.2018 none had

appeared on behalf of the opposite party however, with a view to give one more opportunity for appearance of opposite party, the case was listed on

the next date. Thereafter on 08.03.2018 despite repeated call none had appeared on behalf of the opposite party and it was made clear that if on the

next date none appears on behalf of the opposite party the matter shall be heard as per materials available on record. Today also none appears on

behalf of the opposite party.

4.

Admittedly the petitioner has instituted the maintenance case and the guardianship case prior to the institution of Matrimonial Suit No.378 of 2017

by the opposite party at Jamshedpur. In such circumstances, the opposite party has to appear in the maintenance case as well as in the guardianship

case in the courts at Ranchi. In the attending facts, no inconvenience will be caused to the opposite party if the aforesaid matrimonial suit is

transferred from the Family Court, Jamshedpur to the Family Court, Ranchi. Accordingly, Matrimonial Suit No.378 of 2017, pending before the

Principal Judge, Family Court, Jamshedpur is ordered to be transferred to the court of the Principal Judge, Family Court, Ranchi at the stage as it is.

5.

This transfer petition is, hereby, allowed.

6.

Let a copy of this order be communicated to the courts below.Â

                  Â