Sangeeta Grover vs Ranjan Grover

In this application filed by the wife under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, she has prayed for transfer of Case No.60/2017 from the

Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Katni to the Competent Court at Jabalpur.

Briefly stated, the facts are that the applicant and the respondent solemnized marriage on 11-05-2003 through Hindu customs. The case of the

wife is that she was harassed and tortured by the husband and the family members. Father of applicant passed away on 19-02-2006. Her only

brother Kapil is suffering from ''stiff neck with scoliosis''. He is disabled to the extent of 40%. The applicant''s mother is an aged ailing old lady and

her financial condition is very bad. The applicant could not stay with the husband and ultimately she came back to her mother''s place. The

applicant travelled with her two sons to Bhavnagar via Delhi. The respondent lodged a missing complaint in the police station and the police

recovered her and two sons from Bhavnagar (Gujarat). In January 2017, the respondent preferred an application before the Juvenile Board at

Jabalpur stating that two children are in custody of present applicant and they are not safe and thus they be handed over to the applicant. The

applicant submits that her two sons are school going children. The respondent filed an application under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act,

1955 on 03-05- 2017 before the competent Court at Katni, which was registered as Case. No.60/17. The applicant, in turn, appeared before the

said Court and filed her reply. The applicant has no support from any male member and she had to travel all the way to Katni to contest the said

matter. Katni is about 100 kms away from Jabalpur. Considering the aforesaid, the said case bearing No.60/17 may be directed to be transferred

to Jabalpur.

The respondent has not filed any reply. Shri Piyush Bhatnagar, learned counsel for the respondent formally opposed the said contention.

I have heard the parties at length and perused the record.

This Court in MCC. No.501/12 (Smt. Anjo Bai @ Asha Bai vs. Raj Kishor Yadav) held as under:-

The applicant contended that the respondent and his family members are threatening the applicant and forcing her to enter into a compromise.

Regarding said threatening, the applicant preferred various complaints filed as Annexure A/1 to A/4 before various authorities. The applicant has

no source of income and she is dependent upon her parents. For these reasons, she prayed for transfer of the matter. This Court on 13-04-2012

passed an interim order and stayed the proceedings of Civil Suit No.53-A/11. The respondent has not filed reply till date and nobody appeared

for the respondent even in the pass over round. As per Registry Note dated 18- 04-2013, the respondent is served.

In the aforesaid factual backdrop ground, the basic question is whether the Civil Suit should be directed to be transferred. The point involved in

this case is no more res integra. In the recent judgment reported in 2017 (2) MPLJ 123 (Apeksha Yadav vs. Amit Kumar Yadav), this Court held

that the wife staying at Bhopal is facing a divorce petition by her husband filed at Pipariya (Hoshangabad), the apprehension in the mind of wife is

that if she goes to Pipariya to depose her statement, she may be subjected to an untoward incident by the respondent. This Court directed to

transfer the matter.

After considering the judgment reported in 2010 (4) MPLJ 391 (Jyoti Bangde vs. Sanjay Bangde), this Court directed to transfer the matter to

Bhopal. Similarly, in another recent judgment 2017 (3) MPLJ 461 (Veena vs. Subhash Rao), the Court has taken the same view. In 2017 (4)

MPLJ 196 (Saifali Saraf vs. Aantriksha Saraf), another Bench of this Court has taken the same view and directed for transfer of the matter.

Considering the aforesaid, I find justification in the prayer of the applicant seeking transfer of Civil Suit No.53- A/11. Accordingly, this

application is allowed. The matrimonial matter i.e. Civil Suit No.53-A/11 is directed to be transferred from the Court of Additional District Judge,

Panna to the Court of District Judge, Katni. The Court at Panna shall forthwith send the record to Family Court, Katni. The Family Court Katni

shall proceed with the matter in accordance with law.

This Court on the basis of judgment of Apeksha Yadav vs. Amit Kumar Yadav reported in 2017 (2) MPLJ 123 held that if there exists an

apprehension in the mind of the wife that if she goes to Piparia, she may be subjected to a untoward incident at the behest of respondent, it is

sufficient ground to order the transfer of the case.

In the present case, it is clear that it will be very inconvenient for the applicant to attend the Court proceeding which are instituted at a different

place then the place where the applicant is stationed. She has two children to look after and no male member is available to support her. In this

factual backdrop, I deem it proper to allow this application.

In the result, it is ordered that the Case No.60/17 pending before the Principal Judge, Family Court Katni shall be transferred to the Family

Court at Jabalpur and later Court shall proceed with the matter in accordance with law.

The application is allowed. No cost.