Karnataka High Court
Deepa Kulkarni vs Pranavananda Veni on 15 September, 2022
Author: M.G.S.Kamal
Bench: M.G.S.Kamal
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.G.S.KAMAL
CIVIL PETITION No.200018/2022
BETWEEN:
SMT.DEEPA KULKARNI
W/O MR. PRANAVANANDA VENI,
AGE: ABOUT 32 YEARS,
R/O: # 43 RAGHAVENDRA NILAYA,
RADHA KRISHNA NAGAR,
IBRAHIMPUR,
VIJAYAPURA-586109.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI.D P AMBEKAR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
MR.PRANAVANANDA VENI
S/O TARANATH DIXIT VENI,
AGE: ABOUT 33 YEARS,
R/O: # 147, BLOCK D,
SLS SILICON VALLEY APARTMENTS,
NEAR ROYAL FRESH MART,
BELATHUR, KADUGODI,
BENGALURU-560067.
... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI.SACHIN M.MAHAJAN, ADVOCATE)
2
This Civil Petition is filed under Section 24 of CPC,
praying to allow this petition and transfer said
M.C.No.471/2021 filed by the respondent herein against
the petitioner herein under Section 13(1)(i-a) of the Hindu
Marriage Act, 1955, pending on the file of the V Addl.
Senior Civil Judge, Bengaluru Rural, to the Court of the
Judge, Family Court, Vijayapura for being decided as per
law.
This petition coming on for Admission this day, the
Court made the following:-
ORDER
The present petition is filed by the petitioner- wife seeking transfer of petition in M.C.No.471/2021 filed by respondent-husband under Section 13(1) (i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955, pending on the file of V Addl. Senior Civil Judge Benagluru Rural to the Family Court, Vijayapura.
2. It is the case of the petitioner that her marriage with respondent was solemnized on 20.06.2019 at Maheshwari Bhavana, Vijayapura as per the customs and rituals prevailing in their community. That parent of the petitioner had catered 3 to all the demands of respondent in the form of gold, silver, cash and other articles. That petitioner went to Bengaluru to lead marital life with the respondent- husband. However, shortly respondent and his family members started ill-treating and abuse petitioner without any fault of her by demanding dowry. That the petitioner was diagnosed of Thyroid and was under medication due to which the respondent and his family members had concluded that she would not be able to conceive and that with an intention of getting rid of her and to perform another marriage to the respondent, ousted her from the matrimonial house. Despite the request and pleading by the petitioner and her parents, respondent remained adamant. Thereafter, to the shock and surprise of the petitioner, respondent has filed a petition in M.C.No.471/2021 against the petitioner under Section 13(1)(i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, which is pending on the file of the 4 V Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Bengaluru Rural seeking decree of divorce. That the petitioner is currently residing with her parents at Vijayapura the address shown in the cause title. The petitioner is suffering from Thyroid and having been subjected to torture and stress at the hands of the respondent, she is also suffering from allergy. Under these conditions, she is not able to travel from Vijayapura to Bengaluru covering the distance of 550 km to attend the proceedings as she has nobody to accompany her. Hence, sought for transfer of petition.
3. Resisting the aforesaid petition statement of objections has been filed on behalf of respondent denying the petition averments and further contended that as a counter blast to the aforesaid petition for divorce filed by the respondent, the petitioner herein has filed several cases against the respondent and his family members including the private complaint in 5 C.C.No.98/2022 and a complaint under Domestic Violence Act. That the petitioner is presently working at Manuh Solutions India Private Ltd., Sheshadripuram, Bengaluru and she is still continues to work in the same job and drawing monthly salary. That the petitioner being employed at the aforesaid company working at Bengaluru cannot contend that she is not able to travel to Bengaluru. It is further contended that the respondent is working on a project of US based public sector and for the compliance of its policies, he should submit himself, his laptop, mobile phone etc, for data security checking for possible data breach at his Bengaluru office regularly and the failure of which can impact his career deleteriously. Hence, sought for dismissal of the petition.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the records.
6
5. The marriage of the petitioner and respondent is not in dispute. Even as seen from the cause title of the petition in M.C.No.471/2021, the respondent has given the address of the petitioner as under;
Mrs.Deepa W/o; Mr.Pranavananda Veni Aged about: 31 years, R/at: #43 Raghavendra Nilaya, Radha Krishna Nagar, Ibrahimpur, Bijapur (Vijayapura)-586109.
6. Section 19 of the Hindu Marriage Act provides that every petition under the Act shall be presented to District Court within the local limits of whose ordinary original civil jurisdiction marriage was solemnized, or the respondent, at the time of presentation of the petition resides or the parties to the marriage last resided, and in case if wife is the petitioner, where she is residing on the date of presentation of the petition. In the instant case, the place of present residence of petitioner is one 7 mentioned in the cause title i.e. Vijayapura. Further the Apex Court in the case of N.C.V.Aishwarya Vs. A.S.Saravana Karthik Sha, 2022 Livelaw (SC) 627, has held as under;
"It is the wife's convenience which must be looked at while considering transfer in the matrimonial matters, wherever Courts are called upon to consider the plea of transfer, the Courts have to take into consideration the economic soundness of both the parties, the social strata of the spouses and their behavioural pattern, their standard of life prior to the marriage and subsequent thereto and the circumstances of both the parties in eking out their livelihood and under whose protective umbrella they are seeking their sustenance to life."
7. In the instant case, though it is contended on behalf of the respondent that petitioner is working in a company at Bengaluru, learned counsel for 8 petitioner submits that she is working Online and she is residing at Vijayapura. Considering the material placed on record with regard to the health condition of the petitioner-wife of she suffering from Thyroid and being under medication and also her pleading of she being alone not able to travel 550 km from Vijayapura to Bengaluru to attend the case, in view of the provisions of Section 19 of the Hindu Marriage Act and the law laid down by the Apex Court referred to herein above, this Court is of the considered view that the above petition deserves to be allowed. Hence, the following:
ORDER
(a) The petition is allowed.
(b) The petition in M.C.No.471/2021 filed by
the respondent-husband pending
consideration on the file of the V Addl.9
Senior Civil Judge, Bengaluru Rural be withdrawn and transferred to Family Court, Vijayapura.
(c) The Family Court, Vijayapura, shall proceed after affording sufficient opportunities to the parties in the matter in accordance with law.
Sd/-
JUDGE msr