Smt. Vittal Devika vs Praveen Kumar K.

A.S. Bopanna, J.—The petitioner is before this Court praying that the petition in M.C. No. 12/2011 pending on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Puttur, Dakshina Kannada be transferred to the Family Court at Bangalore for further consideration of the petition. The petitioner herein is the wife of the respondent. The respondent has instituted a petition u/s 13(1)(i)(ia)(ib)(vi) of Hindu Marriage Act seeking dissolution of the marriage. The petitioner herein who is arrayed as respondent has appeared and filed the objection statement. Since, the petitioner herein is employed in a Public Sector Undertaking, namely M/s. Hindustan Aeronautics Limited at Bangalore and the minor son of the parties is also residing with the petitioner who is attending school in Bangalore, the petitioner on the issue of convenience has filed the instant petition u/s 24 of the CPC seeking withdrawal of the case from the Court where it is pending and to transfer and assign the same to the Family Court at Bangalore.

The respondent has appeared and filed the objection statement to the petition. Though issues relating to the main matter have been adverted therein, the respondent has also contended that the cause of action for the petition had arisen within the jurisdiction of the Court where the petition has been filed inasmuch as the wedding had taken place at Uppinangadi. The son was born at Puttur and after the marriage, the parties had resided at Puttur for some time. Having taken note of the objection statement, insofar as the jurisdiction of the Court to decide the issue at Puttur, there can be no dispute whatsoever. However, when a petition is filed u/s 24 of the Civil Procedure Code, this Court would have to look into the convenience of the parties, more particularly in a matrimonial dispute and transfer is sought at the instance of the wife.

In the instant case, the petitioner who is the wife is before this Court pleading inconvenience to attend the proceedings in the Court of Puttur. No doubt, the learned counsel for the respondent would submit that the respondent is ready and willing to bear the expenses of the petitioner to travel to Puttur and take part in the proceedings in my opinion, in the instance case, the case of the petitioner is not that due to financial difficulties, she is unable to attend the proceedings at Puttur, but due to her employment in a Public Sector Undertaking and also the education of the child in Bangalore which would get disturbed as and when she has to attend the hearing dates at Puttur.

Further, what is also necessary to be noticed is the fact that the respondent herein is presently residing at Muscot is not in dispute. If that be the position, in any event, if the petition is transferred to Bangalore, it would be to the convenience of both the parties, more particularly to the petitioner who has expressed inconvenience to attend the Court at Puttur. Therefore, keeping these aspects in view, the petition is allowed. The case in M.C. No. 12/2011 pending before the Senior Civil Judge, Puttur, Dakshina Kannada is withdrawn from the said Court and a direction is issued to transfer the same to the Family Court at Bangalore. On receipt of the papers, the Principal Judge, Family Court at Bangalore may assign the petition to itself or to the appropriate Court. To avoid further delay by issue of notice, it is directed that the parties or their learned counsel may appear before the Family Court on 24.10.2013 as the first date for appearance without further notice. Thereafter, the Family Court at Bangalore shall regulate the proceedings and dispose of the same in accordance with law in a expeditious manner.

In terms of the above, the petition stands disposed of.