Chattisgarh High Court
Smt. Bindiya Dansena vs Rakesh Dansena on 14 January, 2025
1
2025:CGHC:2253
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
TPC No. 207 of 2024
1 - Smt. Bindiya Dansena D/o Parasram Ijardar Aged About 32 Years W/o Rakesh
Dansena, Occupation- Nothing, R/o Village- Godam, Tahsil Sarangarh, District :
Sarangarh-Bilaigarh, Chhattisgarh
... Applicant
Versus
1 - Rakesh Dansena S/o Mahesh Lal Dansena Aged About 38 Years Occupation-
Business, R/o Village- Chhapora, Tahsil- Pusaur, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh
... Non-Applicant
For Applicant : Mr. Roop Ram Naik, Advocate
For Non-applicant : Mr. Prem Shankar Yadav, Advocate
SB: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge
ORDER ON BOARD
14/01/2025
1. Petitioner (wife) has filed this transfer petition under Section 24 of the Code
of Civil Procedure seeking prayer for transfer of Cr.M.J.C. No. F 109/2023
(Bindiya Dansena vs. Rakesh Dansena), pending before the Court of learned
Family Court, Raigarh, District - Raigarh to the Court of learned Upper
District Judge, Sarangarh/Family Court Sarangarh, District Sarangarh-
Bilaigarh (C.G.).
2. Brief facts of the case are that marriage of petitioner and the respondent was
solemnized on 26.04.2016 according to Hindu customs. Petitioner filed an
application under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. pleading that respondent
deserted her. At present, petitioner is living separately in her parental house
at village Godam, Tahsil – Sarangarh, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G).
Digitally
BALRAM signed by
PRASAD BALRAM
DEWANGAN PRASAD
DEWANGAN
2
3. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the petitioner is residing at Village
Godam and had filed an application under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. for
grant of maintenance before the Family Court, District – Raigarh which is
pending consideration and it is at the stage of recording of evidence of the
applicant. He submits that the petitioner at present is residing in her parents
house at village Godam, her mother died and father is aged about 70 years.
From her place of residence, Raigarh is about 40 kms., whereas, the Court at
Sarangarh where she is intending to get the the application to be transferred
is only 20 kms. One appeal against the order of Magistrate passed under the
Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (hereinafter for
brevity referred to as the Act, 2005) is also pending consideration before the
Additional District and Sessions Judge, Sarangarh and for the reasons stated
above, it will be appropriate and in the interest of the parties, if the
application pending under Section 125 Cr.P.C. pending before the Family
Court, District – Raigarh be transferred to the Court at Sarangarh to be tried
at same place.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents opposes the
submission of the counsel for the applicant and would submit that it is the
petitioner herself who has filed an application under Section 125 of Cr.P.C.
before the Family Court, Raigarh, District – Raigarh and therefore, no ground
is made out for transfer of the case. However, he do not dispute the
submission of the counsel for the petitioner that one proceeding under the
Act, 2005 is pending consideration before the Court of Additional District and
Sessions Judge, District – Sarangarh-Bilaigarh.
5. I have heard learned counsel for parties and perused the documents placed
on record.
6. Submission of learned counsel for petitioner is that she is residing in her
parents house at Village – Godam, District – Sarangarh-Bilaigarh and its
distance from Sarangarh is not disputed/ opposed by learned counsel for
respondent in specific terms. One appeal under the Act, 2005 is pending in
the Court at Sarangarh is also not in dispute.
3
7. Convenience of the wife to attend the case is also one of the considerations
at the time of deciding transfer petition. Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of of
N.C.V. Aishwarya vs. A.S. Saravana Karthik reported in 2022 SCC Online
SC 1199, has held as under:-
“9. The cardinal principle for exercise of power under
section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure is that the
ends of justice should demand the transfer of the
suit, appeal or other proceeding. In 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. Given the
prevailing socio-economic paradigm in the Indian
society, generally, it is the wife’s convenience which
must be looked at while considering transfer.”
8. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Sumita Singh vs. Kumar Sanjay
and another, reported in (2001) 10 SCC 41 has observed that if husband
files suit against wife, then convenience of wife must be looked into. Hon’ble
Supreme Court in the matter of Rajani Kishor Pardeshi vs. Kishore
Babulal Pardeshi, reported in (2005) 12 SCC 237 has observed that the
convenience of wife is to be preferred over the convenience of the husband.
9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in light of the of law laid
down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the opinion of this Court, it is a fit
case for transfer of the case as prayed for by petitioner/wife.
10. Learned counsel for the parties jointly submitted that petitioner sought
transfer of the case to the Family Court at Sarangarh, however, as of now
learned Family Court is not functioning there and all the cases for grant of
maintenance are being heard by the Judicial Magistrate, Sarangarh, District
Sarangarh-Bilaigarh.
11. Accordingly, this transfer petition is allowed. It is ordered that Cr.M.J.C. No. F
109/2023 (Bindiya Dansena vs. Rakesh Dansena), pending before learned
4
Family Court, Raigarh, District – Raigarh be transferred to Court of
Magistrate, Sarangarh, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh.
12. The Family Court, Raigarh, District – Raigarh is directed to transfer the
record of the above case to the Court of Magistrate, Sarangarh-Bilaigarh
forthwith. Parties are directed to appear before the court of Magistrate,
Sarangarh-Bilaigarh on 11.02.2025.
13. The learned Magistrate, Sarangarh-Bilaigarh will make all endevours to
conclude the proceedings of the case at the earliest subject to co-operation
by the parties.
14. Registry of this Court is directed to send the copy of order to the Family
Court, Raigarh, District – Raigarh for necessary action.
Sd/-
(Parth Prateem Sahu)
Judge
Dey
[ad_1]
Source link