Smt K G Shobha vs B H Jayaram on 28 June, 2010

[Cites 5, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Smt K G Shobha vs B H Jayaram on 28 June, 2010

Bench: S.Abdul Nazeer

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 28?" DAY OF JUNE 2010

BEFORE

THE HONBLE MRJUSTICE s. ABDUL  1' 

CIVIL PETITION N0.6i']'2{}1O  _,   A

BETWEEN :

Smt. KG. Shobha

W/0. B.H. Jayaram

Age: 33 years v _ 

Occ:H0use wife & service  ~ j . A  _

R/0. D. N0.706, 15' E Cross '- _  A

15" Main   "

Basaveshwar Nagaii       

Bangalore 5604.079 sjf"  . A' 'V  if; ,  PETITIONER

{By Sri   

AND :

B.H. J ayaram A

" 'S./0. . E¥:Ia11ama1§fVh'a------Setty
 Age:  yeé.i's _ 
'Oct; Engg.._ Service --._

RIO.  NQ,'1vQ62f/K-].V.1'0
1*" Main; 71" -Cr-osis

 A ' A . Vidyaranyap.t11'?a--m

Mysore"-~  O08  RESPONDENT

2 '{BynSz'_1'_: C113. Gopaia Swamy, Adv} This CP is filed under section 24 of CPC praying.-___to transfer the proceedings in M.C. No.2"77/09 on the file of the Judge, Family Court at Mysore to the Judge, Court at Bangalore and etc. This petition coming on for Admission Court made the following: _ 4' 9~33-Q§.3 The petitioner was n1arrie'd::to theta 11.03.2001 at Sri. Ja:gajyot_hliWg_Kalyana Mantapa, Vijayanagar, were born out of their 3.6.2005 respectively. started ill--

treating h'er* ::fi.;£nst.anee it uncle Ugrashetty. Therefore:!._ﬂ5lrie' tiiéaTg.[¢r;{;;1ﬁ§1Vp__Ccase m c.c No.1-42/2009 pending on th.eyf2'le lot tlié Adel}. Civil Judge [Srd. Dn.) and Mysore. "unVde_rprsection 498~A IPC and sections 3 3r1dI}.,ot' Dourr3r:Pr.o_hibition Act. It is further contended that the .1;e'ls.pyondle"r;t__hasl.iile<:l a case in M.C. No.27?'/2009 under C it sectionw13{«i}.[ja}lib} 81 {iii} of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, the Fanilly Court at Mvsore, seeking dissolution of 1113

1...' 'J l_'1narriage'l with the petitioner. She has filed a criminal Misc. {:1 r 3 1\lo.l4»68/2009 under the provisions of the Domestic Violence Act which is pending before the competent Conrt at Bangalore. Therefore, the petitioner has filed the petiton u/s.24 of CPC seeking transfer C' No.27?/2009. pending on the file o:I';the"Faniily' C:oltii"tvla{;' Mysore to the Family Court at Banga1oite_:".V_z

2. The respondent has fil.ed-...statern.ent _oi'lv.vol:A'33}._ec*tii.ori§s contending that the petitioner haslxliveeii.._purstiingAthe case filed by her in C.C. No. it before the competent Court at--Myso:re'."'»lt:"isl f1ir,t_h'e:r;coi'itended that in order to 'proseciite_the=Saidcase, she has been travelling to Mysore. Since had to attend the cases filed by the;'petitior1e-re'atlfiaviigalore, he could not attend his he lost the job and he is unemployed as of_c-now,W.,. it Learned Cousnel for the petitioner would contend C yV.t'hAat..si:r;ce the respondent. was harassing the petitioner, she to lodge a complaint under the provisions of Domestic 'xi 4

-Violence Act as also criminal. case under section 4§98--A of IPC. She has to maintain her two children and thatpihe respondent has not been paying any rnaintenance past one year. She does not have male supportljdtovtraveﬁll V' along with her to Mysore to prose.cu"te.'herJ "

further contended that the respondent oiynsd propvertiesl in of which he is getting rent. 'l»'h_e'1"el'ore,A""I\/ItCV,l}.lo;27?'/"2009 pending on the file of the Family._..0Ao1.11't.._at Myso.re rnay be transferred to Family Court .Ba_png;af.ol'retf ..

4. Learned for the would submit that the zvpetitionser isdiitraxrelliltlg to Mysore to prosecute the criminal. 'case Since the respondent is unernployed, ahev_VVh.a.s'- dnideans t.o travel to Bangalore. :_'j'xl'ThereVtore;.'*-the p.pet;ition""i'iled by him. in M.C. No.27?/2009 "s:houi_d 'not,loe..4t1'ansferred to the Family Court at Bangalore.

5.» l"'«fhere is no dispute that the petitioner was to the respondent. on 11.3.2001 and two Children born out of their wedlock on 31.13.2003 and 3.6.2005. K 5 it is also not in dispute that the respondent has not been paying maintenance to his children who are staying with the petitioner for the past one year. 'E'herei'ore.V.» petitioner alone has to take care of her children. Vl1as'i-to . it attend to her Work. It is also i1()-timi'1't'~.dlSp11tfI".ltlli;1lVltvllt} petitioner is staying separately at _A'I't.--.;'vs..

established that whenever to consider the plea of transfer in rnlatt.es,_!§",'ourt;s have t.o take into consideration--t.i_helé:oo'no1ni.o soundness of either of the parties; the"VsoC'ia¥1 'spouses and behavioural _patt'ern_;:__--.their__standart1. ot',lii'e antecedent. of marriage andstifhseqiiieiitythereon and the Circumstances of either of the parties.eki-ngout their livelihood and under whose_ uprotelotivet_"uIn'i3rella, they are seeking their 's.L1§ternan,_Q»Z bfA.1ife.llll'I'he"Apex Court in SUMITA SINGH VS. guvn ANOTHER (AIR 2002 so 396) has held in filed by a husband against his wife, it is 'the wi.fe's}Convenienoe which must be looked at. Having '*.r'egar'd~tto the facts and Circumstances of the Case, i am oi :-

View that this a fit Case for transfer of i\/LC. l No.27'?/2009 from the Family Court at Mysore to the Family Court at Bangalore.

' 6. ln the result, the civil petition SuCC€€iL1vSi:'dtv31Cl"wi:t'iS u 'N accordingly allowed. 1 direct the:'..ira33sl:e'rlll'Of.l 277/2009 pending on the file of:th_e to the Family Court at E3a1igalore.lVl'l'f*J.o' costs: V' A JUDGE

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court