Madhya Pradesh High Court
Chhavi Gupta vs Amit Gupta on 9 December, 2016
MCC-2126-2016
(CHHAVI GUPTA Vs AMIT GUPTA)
09-12-2016
Shri R.S.Rathore, learned counsel for the petitioner.
None for the respondent.
By filing this petition under Section 24 of Civil Procedure Code, the petitioner wife is seeking transfer of matrimonial case bearing C.S.HM.89A/2015, filed by the respondent/husband for restitution of conjugal rights under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 pending before the Family Court, Panna (MP) to the Family Court, Anuppur (MP).
In short, the petitioner's case is that she is married with respondent Amit Gupta. The marriage was solemnized in the year 2012 and after marriage the petitioner was living with her husband/respondent in Panna and they have a child, aged about 3 years. It is averred that after some time of marriage the respondent started harassing and misbehaving with the petitioner for demand of dowry. Due to these pain and sufferings she came to her parentsâ house at Village Bijuri, District Anuppur alongwith her child. Petitioner lodged a report against the respondent at Police Station Gunnor, District Panna under section 498-A of IPC and section 3/ 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. Petitioner has also filed a case under section 125 of CrPC for grant of maintenance against respondent, which is pending before JMFC, Kotma, District Anuppur. Meanwhile, the respondent has filed a petition under section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, which is pending before Principal Judge, Panna. It is submitted by petitioner she is a lady having three years old child, having no source of income and nobody to escort her to Panna in order to attend the proceeding before Family Court, therefore, it is prayed that the case under section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act be transferred from Family Court, Panna to Family Court, Anuppur.
Even after notice of this petition, none appeared for the respondent.
Considering the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner and also perusal of the documents in support of petition, it appears that the petitioner is wife of the respondent. She is living with her parents at Bijuri, District Anuppur. She has no apparent source of income and seems to be dependent upon her parents. Bijuri is far away from Panna. Therefore, it is obvious that it will be difficult for her to go on the way from Bijuri to Panna with a young child of three years, without any escorts to contest the proceedings from time to time.
For transfer of the proceedings the convenience of the parties is to be considered.
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Anjali Ashok Sadhwani Vs. Ashok Kishinchand Sadhwani 2009 Vol- XVI SCC 188 has transferred the matrimonial dispute at the request of wife, considering the fact that the applicant wife had no one in her family to escort during her journey from Mumbai to Indore.
In present case, considering the difficulties of petitioner/wife, who is dependent upon her parents and apparently has no escort to accompany her to Panna during the hearing of the petition, when the respondent can come from Panna to Anuppur to attend the Court proceedings. Therefore, balance of convenience appears in favour of the petitioner. Thus, under these circumstances, it would be appropriate to transfer the petition pending before the Family Court, Panna to Family Court, Anuppur.
Consequently, the petition is allowed. The C.S.HM.89A/2015 pending before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Panna, is hereby transferred to the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Anuppur.
Parties are directed to remain present before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Anuppur on 23.01.2017.
(ANURAG SHRIVASTAVA) JUDGE TG /-