Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Mamta vs Kailash Chand Agrawal

Supreme Court22 November 2021B.V. Nagarathna

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

Where a defendant to matrimonial proceedings resides at a considerable distance from the court in which the case is pending, and faces substantial practical difficulty in travelling to defend the case, the Supreme Court may, under Section 25 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, transfer the proceedings to a court in the state or locality where the defendant resides, in the interests of justice.

Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.

Judgment

As delivered

1

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) NO.2460 OF 2019

MAMTA Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

KAILASH CHAND AGRAWAL Respondent(s)

O R D E R

This petition has filed under Section 25 of the Code of Civil

Procedure ,1908 by the petitioner-wife seeking transfer of Divorce

case No. 94 of 2018 titled as “Shri Kailash Chand Agrawal Vs. Smt.

Mamta” under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, pending in

the Court of Additional District Judge, No. 1, Aburoad, Sirohi,

Rajasthan to the Court of the 28-4 th Additional Civil Judge & JMFC,

Ghandinagar, Gujarat.

By Order dated 18th October, 2019, notice was issued to the

respondent and the same has been served on the respondent as per

postal tracking report on 19.11.2019. But there is no

representation on behalf of the respondent.

In the aforesaid circumstances, I have heard learned counsel

for the petitioner and perused the material on record.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the

aforesaid case has been filed by the respondent in Sirohi in the Signature Not Verified

Court Digitally signed by Dr. Mukesh Nasa of Additional District Judge, No. 1, Aburoad, Sirohi, Date: 2021.11.26 14:36:15 IST Reason:

Rajasthan, while the petitioner is residing in Gandhinagar Gujarat

which is a distance of about 237 Km. That it is not possible for 2

the petitioner to travel all the way to Sirohi district of

Rajasthan for the purpose of defending the aforesaid case. In such

circumstances, the transfer of aforesaid divorce case has been

sought.

As already noted, despite service of notice of the respondent,

there is no representation.

Having regard to the facts pleaded in the petition and on

hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, I find that it is just

and appropriate to transfer the Divorce Case No. 94 of 2018 titled

as “Shri Kailash Chand Agrawal Vs. Smt. Mamta” pending on the file

of Additional District Judge, No. 1, Aburoad, Sirohi, Rajasthan to

the Court of the Additional Civil Judge & JMFC, Ghandinagar,

Gujarat.

Ordered accordingly.

The petition is allowed in the aforesaid terms.

.................................J. [B.V. NAGARATHNA]

NEW DELHI;

NOVEMBER 22, 2021

This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.

Research this judgment with Miss Lucy

Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.

Try Miss Lucy free