Tripura High Court
Smti. Shikha Rani Das (Bhowmik) vs Sri Arun Bhowmik on 29 August, 2019
Equivalent citations: AIR 2020 TRIPURA 12, AIRONLINE 2019 TRI 117, (2019) 3 DMC 646, (2019) 3 HINDULR 882
Author: Sanjay Karol
Bench: Sanjay Karol
Page 1 of 6
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
AGARTALA
Tr.P. (C) No.15/2019
Smti. Shikha Rani Das (Bhowmik)
----Petitioner(s)
Versus
Sri Arun Bhowmik
----Respondent(s)
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. G.K. Nama, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Paramartha Datta, Advocate, Mr. Tanmay Debbarma, Advocate.
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. SANJAY KAROL Order 29/08/2019 The dispute is inter se husband and wife arises out of matrimonial discord. Marriage inter se the parties was solemnized in the year 2015. It is a matter of record that the parties continued to reside together for a period of 2(two) years, whereafter they separated.
2. Presently, the petitioner-wife is residing at her parental house at a place known as Panisagar, North Tripura District and the respondent-husband is continued to reside at the matrimonial house which is at Jolaibari, Sub-Division Belonia, South Tripura District.
3. Sometime in the month of February, 2019, respondent- husband filed a petition seeking divorce under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 in the Court having jurisdiction at South Tripura, Belonia.
Page 2 of 6
4. 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 Belonia, South Tripura District to the Court having competent jurisdiction at Dharmanagar, North Tripura District.
5. The grounds on which the transfer is sought are; (a) respondent is having an extramarital relationship, which has forced the petitioner to leave her matrimonial house and reside at her parental house; (b) she has to look after her ailing mother;
(c) she has no means or capacity to contest the petition at Belonia; (d) it would be difficult for her to travel all the way to Belonia 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.
6. Opposing such petition, respondent-husband, while denying the allegations of extramarital relationship and constructive desertion, has alleged the petitioner-wife to have voluntarily abandoned the matrimonial house with an intent of severing 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 parents, i.e. father who is 88 years and mother who is 78 years. Also there is none else to look after them.
7. Significantly, respondent-husband has offered to bear the expense for petitioner's travel to the Court at Belonia, further suggesting, transfer of the petition to a Court having competent Page 3 of 6 jurisdiction at Agartala, which is midway between Belonia and Dharmanagar.
8. In support, Mr. G.K. Nama, 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.
9. On the other hand, Mr. Tanmay Debbarma, learned counsel for the respondent, has also referred to and relied upon decisions of the Apex Court in Kalpana Deviprakash Thakar (Smt) vs. Dr. Deviprakash Thakar, (1996) 11 SCC 96 and Anindita Das vs. Srijit Das, (2006) 9 SCC 197.
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.
12. In the instant case, as is evidently clear, the parties hail from a rural background. The wife undisputedly would have to Page 4 of 6 travel long distance and spend the night at a public place. She has an ailing mother and though the application does not record as is orally argued, there is none in her house to look after her mother.
13. On the other hand, one notices that the respondent- husband also has aged parents. But then, there is nothing on record to establish that they are unwell or would not be able to fend for themselves even for a single day. Comparatively, it would be easier for the husband to travel at odd hours by public or private mode of transportation and return to fend for his aged parents same day.
14. 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.
15. 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. Page 5 of 6
16. Significantly, in all the decisions, the Court has clarified that each case has to be considered and decided on the prevalent facts and circumstances. There cannot be any application of thumb rule with regard to transfer of the petition pertaining to matrimonial discord.
17. 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. In any event, if the husband is ready to move out of Belonia for Agartala, he can travel up to Dharmanagar.
18. 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. (Divorce) No.06 of 2019 from the Court of learned District Judge, Belonia, South Tripura to the Court of learned District Judge, Dharmanagar, North Tripura.
19. As such, T.S.(Divorce) No.06/2019, titled as Sri Arun Bhowmik vs. Smt. Shikha Rani Das (Bhowmik), stands transferred from the Court of learned District Judge, Belonia, South Tripura District to the Court of learned District Judge, Dharmanagar, North Tripura.
20. Parties are directed to appear before the transferee Court on 30.09.2019.
Page 6 of 6
21. It may be recorded that this Court had endeavoured to have the matter amicably resolved. Parties were called and made aware of the benefit and advantage of amicable resolution of the dispute at the earliest point in time. Perhaps, better sense may prevail upon them with due passage of time. However, considering the age of the parties and the fact that they have been living separately for the last 2(two) years, hearing of the petition is expedited.
22. 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.
23. 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.
24. Records be also remitted forthwith.
25. Transfer Petition stands disposed of.
26. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.
(SANJAY KAROL), CJ Pulak