- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1809 CP No. 200061 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE CIVIL PETITION NO. 200061 OF 2024 BETWEEN: DEEPA W/O PRANESH KULKARNI, D/O: MANIKRAO KULKARNI, AGE: 36 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O: C/O: KHASHI KAMAL APARTMENT, AFZALPUR ROAD, HIGH COURT ROAD KALABURAGI. …PETITIONER (BY SRI LIYAQAT FAREED USTAD, ADVOCATE) AND: PRANESH KULKARNI S/O KHANDERAO KULKARNI, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: H.NO.7-5-66, MANJULA SADANA, JAWAHAR NAGAR, NGO COLONY RAICHUR – 584 101. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI VADIRAJ KADLOOR, ADVOCATE) THIS CIVIL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 24 OF THE CPC, PRAYING TO TRANSFER THE M.C NO.79/2024 PENDING ON THE FILE OF PRL. JUDGE FAMILY COURT AT RAICHUR TO FAMILY COURT AT KALABURAGI IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC. Digitally signed by BASALINGAPPA SHIVARAJ DHUTTARGAON Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1809 CP No. 200061 of 2024 THIS CIVIL PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the respondent. 2. This petition is filed seeking of transfer of the matrimonial proceeding in MC No.79/2024 on the file of Family Court, Raichur. 3. Said petition is filed seeking dissolution of marriage by the respondent of this petition who is the husband of the petitioner. The petitioner contends that she has already filed a petition seeking maintenance before the Family Court at Kalaburagi and she has a child aged four years from the marriage with the respondent. She claims that distance between Kalaburagi and Raichur is 160 KMs and she is unable to attend the Court at Kalaburagi to defend the case filed against her while her husband seeking dissolution of marriage. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent – husband on the other hand contends that respondent – husband is ready to - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1809 CP No. 200061 of 2024 bear all the traveling expenses of the petitioner when she comes to Kalaburagi to defend the case. He further submits that on the last occasion, when the respondent came to this Court to attend the mediation, there was an attempt to assault the respondent by the wife as well as her brother as such he submits this is not a case to transfer the petitioner from Raichur to Kalaburagi. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that there is no attempt by the petitioner to assault the respondent, on the other hand there was attempt by the respondent – husband who tried to force the petitioner in to his car. 6. This Court has considered the contentions raised at the bar and perused the records. 7. It is not in dispute that the respondent – husband has filed the petition seeking dissolution of marriage before the Family Court, Raichur. At the same time, petitioner – wife though subsequent to the husband’s petition has filed a petition seeking maintenance before Family Court at Kalaburagi. The distance between Kalaburagi and Raichur is 160Km again the - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1809 CP No. 200061 of 2024 same is not in dispute. It is further noticed that wife is staying with four years old child and both of them are staying in Kalaburagi. 8. The matrimonial proceeding does not require attendance of the parties on every date of hearing. If the parties appear on the date of recording evidence of the parties it would be more than sufficient. 9. Under these circumstances, the apprehension of threat projected by both parties shall be taken care of, by directing both the parties not to hold out any threat to each other and they shall attend the Court at Kalaburagi without giving scope for any untoward incident. 10. Hence the following: ORDER i) Writ petition is allowed. ii) Proceedings in MC No.79/2024 on the file of Family Court at Raichur is transferred to the jurisdictional Family Court at Kalaburagi. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1809 CP No. 200061 of 2024 iii) It is made clear that the presence of respondent – husband in Family Court at Raichur on each occasion is not required. It is sufficient for him to attend the Court only on those days, where his presence is absolutely required. iv) It is directed both the parties shall not hold out any threat against each other and both parties shall ensure that no untoward incident takes place when both parties are attending the Court. v) No order as to cost. Sd/- (ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE THM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 36