Allahabad High Court
Prabha Tripathi vs Priydarshan Tripathi on 21 November, 2022
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 6 Case :- TRANSFER APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 580 of 2022 Applicant :- Prabha Tripathi Opposite Party :- Priydarshan Tripathi Counsel for Applicant :- Vijay Prakash Chaturvedi Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J.
A perusal of the office report dated 14.10.2022, last reiterated on 19.11.2022, shows that notice issued to the opposite party has led to a postal track report showing-"Item Delivery Confirmed". In this view of the matter, service upon the opposite party is held sufficient. Office report further shows that no one has put in appearance.
When the case is called on, Mr. Suvash Ram, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Vijay Prakash Chaturvedi is present on behalf of the applicant. No one appears on behalf of the opposite party.
Heard forthwith.
This transfer application has been filed by the wife seeking transfer of Case No. 320 of 2022, Priydarshan Tripathi vs. Prabha Tripathi, under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act from the Principal Judge, Family Court, Ballia to the Principal Judge, Family Court, Siddharth Nagar.
It is made out that the applicant is staying with her parents at Siddharth Nagar. The applicant has no source of income of her own and cannot bear the expense involved in the journey to attend at Ballia on every date. The applicant's father is a handicapped man, who is not well off. She is dependent upon her father for her sustenance and that of the minor children of parties. In the circumstances, the applicant does not have the necessary wherewithal to attend proceedings at Ballia on every date scheduled. It is made out by the applicant that there are three cases pending inter partes at Siddharth Nagar, details whereof are mentioned in paragraph nos. 12, 13 14 and 15 of the affidavit filed in support of the application and in case the proceedings at Ballia are moved to Siddharth Nagar, it would be convenient for both parties to suit their cases there on merits. In case, the applicant is forced to attend at Ballia, her defence would be seriously impaired. It is also urged that convenience of the wife about the venue in a matrimonial cause has to be accorded priority.
Since no counter affidavit has been filed, averments in the affidavit have to be taken as unrebutted.
Upon hearing learned counsel for the applicant and perusing the record, this Court finds that two cases are pending inter partes at Siddharth Nagar, one of which is an application for maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C., and the other, an application for remedies under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act. There is nothing on record to show that the opposite party has moved an application seeking transfer of those two cases from Siddharth Nagar to Ballia, or any other station. The opposite party would, therefore, have to attend at Siddharth Nagar and defend himself in the two cases, instituted there by the wife. Therefore, if the present proceedings are moved from Ballia to Siddharth Nagar, it would promote ease of litigation for both parties, where they can request a single date in all three matters. Proceedings venued at one station would save time, resources and energy for both parties and also expedite the outcome.
There is also a specific case that the applicant is a housewife. She has no source of income of her own. She stays with her children, a deserted wife in her parent's home, supported by a handicapped father. She does not receive any maintenance from the opposite party. These allegations, find place in paragraph no. 13 of the affidavit, are unrebutted.
In the circumstances, there is no option for this Court but to accept the applicant's case that given her financial and physical limitations, it is not possible for her to travel the distance of 350 kms. to Ballia one way from Siddharth Nagar, on each date scheduled, and defend the proceedings there.
By contrast, the opposite party is said to be a man, who has sufficient means of income, as asserted in paragraph no. 24 of the affidavit. The opposite party is also an able-bodied man. In the circumstances, it would not be difficult for him to appear before the Court at Siddharth Nagar and defend the proceedings at Ballia that he has instituted, in the event it is transferred. Moreover, the opposite party, as has already been remarked, has to appear and defend himself in the two cases, brought by the wife before the Courts at Siddharth Nagar.
Quite apart, the convenience of the wife about the venue is favoured in matrimonial causes and nothing has been shown in this case to make it different from the rule. In this regard, reference may be made to the decision of the Supreme Court in Anjali Ashok Sadhwani Vs. Ashok Kishinchand Sadhwani, AIR 2009 SC 1374, where it has been held that in matrimonial causes, the convenience of the wife is a good ground to grant transfer. In this connection, reference may further be made to the recent decision of the Supreme Court in N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs. A.S. Saravana Karthik Sha, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1199.
In the opinion of this Court, good grounds for transferring the proceedings are made out.
The Transfer Application is allowed.
The proceedings of Case No. 320 of 2022, Priydarshan Tripathi vs. Prabha Tripathi, under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, are withdrawn from the file of the Principal Judge, Family Court, Ballia and transferred to Principal Judge, Family Court at Siddharth Nagar, who may proceed to try the case himself or assign to it to an Additional Principal Judge, available on the Court, as he deems fit. In either case, trial shall be expedited and endeavour shall be made to conclude the same within six months of the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The Principal Judge, Family Court, Ballia shall cause the records of the case to be transmitted forthwith to the Principal Judge, Family Court, Siddharth Nagar.
Let this order be communicated to the Principal Judge, Family Court, Ballia and the Principal Judge, Family Court, Siddharth Nagar by the Registrar (Compliance).
Order Date :- 21.11.2022 Deepak