1 2025:CGHC:15775 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR TPC No. 45 of 2025 1 - Nishant Kumar Singh S/o S.N. Singh Aged About 30 Years Permanent R/o House No. Akash- B509, Harsh Heavens, Ashok Nagar, D.P. Law College Road, Sarkanda, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. Current Residence- F-1120, 12th Floor, M.J. Lifestyle, Amandeus, Rayasandra, Karnatka, Pin- 560099 ... Petitioner versus 1 - Kanchan Kumari Yadav W/o Nishant Kumar Singh Aged About 28 Years Permanent R/o Quarter No. C-39, Shaktinagar, Jarhi Colony, Police Station Bhatgaon, District Surajpur, Chhattisgarh. Current Residence- C/o Babban Yadav, Flat No.- A-502, Swastik East- 12, Society Kanchana, Shankar Nagar, Raipur, Chhattisgarh, Pin- 492007 ... Respondent For Petitioner : Mr. Animesh Verma, Advocate. For Respondent : Ms. K. Tripti Rao, Advocate Hon'ble Mr. Justice Naresh Kumar. Chandravanshi Order On Board 03-04-2025 Heard. 1. Petitioner/husband has preferred this transfer petition under Section 24 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (henceforth 'CPC') for transfer of Civil Suit 119-A/2024 (Kanchan Kumari Yadav Vs. Nishant Singh) pending before the Family Court, Surajpur to Family Court, Bilaspur. 2 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner / husband would submit that marriage of the petitioner/husband was solemnized with the respondent/wife at Bilaspur on 3rd May, 2023 as per Hindu rites and rituals. Thereafter, they resided together at Bilaspur for about three months. He submits that the petitioner/husband is working in a Private Company at Banglore, Karnataka. He submits that respondent/wife left the company of the petitioner alleging him that he did not take her with him at Banglore, therefore, respondent/wife left the company of petitioner since 31.07.2023 and residing at Raipur whereas her parents are residing at Surajpur. He submits that the petitioner has filed divorce petition in the Family Court, Bilaspur, but respondent/wife has filed an application under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for restitution of conjugal rights in Family Court, Surajpur bearing Civil Suit No. 119-A/2024. He further submits that though permanent resident of respondent/wife is Surajpur, as her parents resides there, but since December, 2023 she is residing at Raipur in a rented house and working in some private company and earning Rs.6,00,000/- per annum, despite that she has filed application u/S 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 bearing Civil Suit No. 119-A/2024 for restitution of conjugal rights in Family Court, Surajpur only to harass the petitioner/husband, therefore, learned counsel for the petitioner/husband prays that since respondent/wife is residing at Raipur and divorce petition bearing civil suit No. 101-A/2025 filed by petitioner/husband is pending before Family Court, Bilaspur, therefore, Civil Suit No. 119-A/2024 filed by respondent/wife may be transferred from Family Court, Surajpur to Family Court, Bilaspur. 3. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent/wife while categorically denying the contention of counsel for the petitioner would submit that though since 2023 respondent/wife is residing at Raipur, but earlier she was doing 3 internship for about 9 months. Subsequently, she is preparing for “IAS” examination at Raipur and residing there in Paying Guest (PG). She is not permanent resident of Raipur, rather she is permanent resident of Surajpur where her parents resides, therefore, merely on the basis of temporary address of respondent/wife, Civil Suit No. 119-A/2024 filed by respondent/wife cannot be transferred from Family Court, Surajpur to Family Court, Bilaspur. Hence, the transfer petition filed by petitioner/husband is liable to be rejected. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 5. Undisputably, respondent/wife has left the company of petitioner/husband and is residing alongwith her parents at Surajpur. Though, since, 2023 she is residing at Raipur, but she is not residing there permanently, rather she is residing as Paying Guest (PG) for the purpose of preparation of competitive examination. The petitioner/husband has not filed any document to demonstrate the fact that respondent/wife is working at Raipur and getting alleged salary of Rs. 6,00,000/- per annum. 6. Though while making submission, counsel for the petitioner/husband contended that Civil Suit bearing No. 119-A/2024 was filed by respondent/wife before Family Court, Surajpur, but since at that time, respondent/wife was not residing there, therefore, the Family Court, Surajpur has no territorial jurisdiction under Section 19 (3) (a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 to entertain aforesaid civil suit. But this contention of learned counsel for the petitioner cannot be accepted in the instant transfer petition, rather if the Family Court, Surajpur has no jurisdiction to entertain the civil suit 4 filed by respondent/wife, then such objection can be raised before that Court. In transfer petition, such issue cannot be considered. 7. On due consideration, I do not find any good ground to transfer Civil Suit No. 119-A/2024 (Kanchan Kumar Yadav vs. Nishant Singh) filed by respondent/wife from Court of Judge, Family Court, Surajpur to the Family Court, Bilaspur. 8. Consequently, the transfer petition (c) fails and is hereby dismissed. No cost(s). Sd/- (Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge Amit AMIT KUMAR DUBEY Digitally signed by AMIT KUMAR DUBEY Date: 2025.04.05 12:20:19 +0530