Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Smt. Sandipa Chakraborty vs Kuntal Chakraborty on 23 April, 2019
Author: Bibek Chaudhuri
Bench: Bibek Chaudhuri
1 23.04.19
Srimanta List - S/L Sl. No. 14 Ct. No. 25 C.O. 3286 of 2014 Smt. Sandipa Chakraborty
-Vs.-
Kuntal Chakraborty Mr. Nabankur Paul, Adv.
...for the petitioner.
Opposite party remains unrepresented when the instant application under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereafter the C.P.C.) is taken up for hearing.
This is an application under Section 24 of the C.P.C. filed by the wife/petitioner praying for transfer of Matrimonial Suit No. 27 of 2014(K) pending before the Court of the learned Additional District Judge, Kalyani, Nadia to the Court of the learned District Judge, Cooch Behar. It is stated by the petitioner in her application under Section 24 of the C.P.C. that the opposite party/husband has filed a suit for restitution of conjugal rights against the petitioner under the provision of Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act before the learned Additional District Judge at Kalyani which was registered as Matrimonial Suit No. 27 of 2014 (K). It is alleged by the petitioner that after marriage the petitioner used to reside with her husband/opposite party at Kalyani. However, she suspected that her husband has illicit relation with his sister-in-law, i.e. the wife of the brother of the opposite party and she protested against such illicit relationship. The end result of such protest was that the petitioner was subjected to physical and mental torture by her husband. During such matrimonial discord, the petitioner gave birth to a male child on 26th November, 2007. After the birth of the child the petitioner again returned to her matrimonial home but could not stay for long due to such illicit relationship between her husband and the wife of her brother-in-law. The petitioner ultimately left her matrimonial home at Kalyani on 8th June, 2009 and took shelter at her paternal home at Cooch Behar. Since the opposite party 2 failed and neglected to maintain the petitioner and their minor child, she filed an application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure praying maintenance from her husband in the Court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate at Cooch Behar. Subsequently, the opposite party filed the aforesaid matrimonial suit only to harass the petitioner. It is further contended by the petitioner that distance between Cooch Behar and Kalyani is about 750 K.M. It is not possible for her parents to accompany the petitioner to Kalyani to contest the said suit filed by the opposite party against her. Moreover, the petitioner's child is aged about 12 years and it is absolutely impossible for the petitioner to attend the proceedings of the said matrimonial suit at Kalyani leaving her minor child under the care of her old ailing parents. The petitioner has also pleaded that if she is compelled to travel Kalyani from Cooch Behar she will face tremendous financial hardship. Therefore, the petitioner has prayed for transfer of the above- mentioned matrimonial suit to the Court of the learned District Judge, Cooch Behar.
Though the opposite party remains unrepresented today, on perusal of the record it is found that the opposite party submitted affidavit-in-opposition against the aforesaid application under Section 24 of the C.P.C. It is pleaded by the opposite party that he resides at Kalyani with his old and ailing parents. His father has undergone a by-pass surgery. The opposite party works as ECG Technician at Kalyani. Therefore, the opposite party can conveniently represent the suit filed by him at Kalyani. If he is directed to attend Cooch Behar Court, it will tell upon his profession because he apprehends that the Doctors will stop referring patients to him for E.C.G. I have heard Mr. Nabankur Paul, learned Advocate for the petitioner, perused the application and affidavit-in-opposition and considered.
Marriage between the parties was solemnized on 24th January, 2007 in the paternal home of the petitioner at Cooch Behar according to Hindu Rites and ceremonies. She gave birth to a male child on 26th November, 2007 at Siliguri 3 Nurshing Home. After the birth of the child she stayed for some days under the care of her parents at Cooch Behar and came back to Kalyani to lead her marital life with the opposite party. But situation compelled her to leave her matrimonial home on 8th June, 2009. Since then she has been living with her minor child at her paternal home at Cooch Behar. It is an undisputed fact that distance between Cooch Behar and Kalyani is about 750 K.M. and it takes about 15 hours to reach Kalyani from Cooch Behar.
Well settled is the law that while disposing of an application under Section 24 of the C.P.C. for transfer of a matrimonial suit from one Court to another, prime consideration for the Court is to consider the convenience of the wife. It is not disputed that the petitioner has been residing at Cooch Behar at her paternal home. She has no source of income. She fully dependent upon her parents. The opposite party is highly irregular in payment of maintenance allowance, the order of which was passed in a proceeding under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the opposite party.
Considering all such aspects of the matter, I am inclined to allow the instant application under Section 24 of the C.P.C.
Accordingly, the application for transfer of Matrimonial Suit No. 27 of 2014(K) pending before the Court of the learned Additional District Judge at Kalyani to the Court of the learned District Judge at Cooch Behar is allowed ex parte, without cost. The above-mentioned matrimonial suit be transferred to the Court of the learned District Judge at Cooch Behar.
Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the learned Additional District Judge at Kalyani as well as the learned District Judge, Cooch Behar for information and compliance.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the learned Advocates for the parties on the usual undertakings.
4(Bibek Chaudhuri, J.)