Tripura High Court
Smt. Anindita Roy vs Sri Abhoy Bhattacharjee on 1 October, 2019
Author: Sanjay Karol
Bench: Sanjay Karol
Page 1 of 6
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
AGARTALA
Tr.P(C) No. 17/2019
Smt. Anindita Roy
----Petitioner(s)
Versus
Sri Abhoy Bhattacharjee
----Respondent(s)
For petitioner(s) : Mr. S. Bhattacharjee, Advocate.
Ms. J. Bhattacharya, Advocate.
For Respondent(s) : None.
[
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. SANJAY KAROL
ORDER
01/10/2019 On 30.09.2019 this Court passed the following order:
"As per office report, service stands served on the sole respondent, but none appears on his behalf. As such, matter will proceed ex-parte against him.
As prayed for by Mr. Bhattacharjee, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, let the matter be listed on 01.10.2019."
2. Despite repeated calls, today also none has entered appearance on behalf of the respondent-husband.
3. The dispute is inter se husband and wife arises out of matrimonial discord. Marriage inter se the parties was solemnized on 06.05.2019. But just after the Baubhat/reception ceremony on 09.05.2019 the respondent and his family members raising some wild allegation, for which the father of the petitioner-wife was called on at West Agartala Women P.S compelled the petitioner-wife to go back to her parental house with her father.
Page 2 of 6
4. Presently, the petitioner-wife is residing at her parental house at a place known as Dharmanagar, North Tripura District and the respondent-husband is continued to reside at the matrimonial house which is at Bjati Abhoynagar, Paschim Para, West Agartala.
5. Sometime in the month of May, 2019, respondent- husband filed a petition seeking decree of Nullity of marriage among the parties Section 12 of the under Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 in the Court having jurisdiction at Agartala, West Tripura.
6. In terms of the present petition so filed under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, petitioner-wife seeks transfer of such petition from the Court having competent jurisdiction at Agartala, West Tripura District to the Court having competent jurisdiction at Dharmanagar, North Tripura District.
7. The grounds on which the transfer is sought are; (a) the petitioner is now residing at her parental house at Dharmanagar and she has to look after her ailing father; (b) she has no means or capacity to contest the petition at Agartala; (c) it would be difficult for her to travel all the way to Agartala to contest the case, for she cannot return to her place of residence in one day and necessarily has to spend the night either at the place of matrimonial house or somewhere else in a hotel alone; as such her safety is at peril.
Page 3 of 6
8. Opposing such petition, respondent-husband, while denying the allegations of constructive desertion, has alleged the petitioner-wife to have voluntarily abandoned the matrimonial house as she is not mentally fit to continue with the matrimonial relationship and ties. Also, it would be far inconvenient for him to travel to Dharmanagar, for he has to fend for his aged mother, who is 70 years and since 1995 has bed ridden. Also there is none else to look after his mother.
9. In support, Mr. S. Bhattacharjee, learned counsel for the petitioner, has referred to and relied upon a decision of the Apex Court reported in Sumita Singh vs. Kumar Sanjay & another, (2001) 10 SCC 41.
10. The power of this Court to transfer the proceedings from one Court to another lies by virtue of Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Though the Section does not provide the grounds on which such petition can be transferred, but it goes without saying that such power has to be exercised in accordance with settled principles of law. The power has to be exercised to advance the cause of justice and in a manner which is just, fair and reasonable.
11. Noticeably, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has acknowledged convenience of the wife to be one such factor in determining the place of adjudication of the petition arising out of matrimonial dispute.
Page 4 of 6
12. In the instant case, as is evidently clear, the parties hail from a rural background. The wife undisputedly would have to travel long distance and spend the night at a public place. She has an ailing father and though the application does not record as is orally argued, there is none in her house to look after her mother.
13. The Apex Court in Anindita Das (supra) has expressed apprehension of misuse of such power of transfer by women, perhaps taking advantage of the leniency shown by the Court. In the said case, the Court rejected the wife's prayer on the ground that she could conveniently travel to Delhi in an air- conditioned train, for which the expense would be borne by the husband and also she could spend the night, if so required, in a three star hotel. Additionally, the husband had agreed to bear the cost for companion. It is under these circumstances, the Court rejected the wife's prayer for transfer of petition.
14. It was under somewhat similar circumstances, the Court took a similar view in Kalpana Deviprakash (supra), for the parties were residing and accustomed to travel by all modes of transportation in a metropolitan city. The wife could conveniently travel from one metropolitan to another metropolitan city through a comfortable mode of transportation, i.e. air-conditioned train.
15. Significantly, in all the decisions, the Court has clarified that each case has to be considered and decided on the Page 5 of 6 prevalent facts and circumstances. There cannot be any application of thumb rule with regard to transfer of the petition pertaining to matrimonial discord.
16. Agartala may be a convenient Court to the husband. But then, it does not, in any manner, remove or lessen the inconvenience or discomfort of the wife.
17. Thus, considering the overall attending facts and circumstances and weighing the scales evenly, this Court finds the petitioner to have made out a case for transfer of T.S. (NUL) No.02 of 2019 from the Court of learned Family Judge, Agartala, West Tripura to the Court of learned District Judge, Dharmanagar, North Tripura.
18. As such, T.S.(Nul) No.02/2019, titled as Sri Abhoy Bhattacharjee vs. Smt. Anindita Roy, stands transferred from the Court of learned Family Judge, Agartala, West Tripura to the Court of learned District Judge, Dharmanagar, North Tripura.
19. Parties are directed to appear before the transferee Court on 30.10.2019.
20. Parties through counsel undertake to fully cooperate and not take any unnecessary adjournment(s). Also they undertake to produce their entire evidence at their own cost and responsibility. Only for official witnesses, assistance of the Court shall be availed.
Page 6 of 6
21. The trial Court is requested to expedite the trial and complete the proceedings within a period of 9(nine) months from the date of first appearance.
22. Records be also remitted forthwith.
23. Transfer Petition stands disposed of. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.
(SANJAY KAROL),CJ.
Dipankar