1 2025:CGHC:32306 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR TPC No. 91 of 2025 Smt. Poonam Sinha W/o Gajendra Sinha Aged About 35 Years R/o Risaipara, Dhamtari, District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner versus Gajendra Sinha S/o Mahesh Sinha Aged About 42 Years Caste Kalar Village Korer, P.S. Korer, Tahsil Bhanupratappur, District Uttar Bastar Kanker Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent For Petitioner : Mr. Shivam Agrawal, Advocate For Respondent : Mr. Sunil Sahu, Advocate (Hon’ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Order on Board 11.7.2025 1. Petitioner/wife has preferred this transfer petition under Section 24 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (henceforth 'CPC') for transfer of Case No. Hindu Marriage Case/26/2024 (Gajendra Sinha vs. Poonam Sinha) pending before District Judge, Bhanupratappur, Distt. North Bastar (CG) to Family Court, Dhamtari (CG). 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/wife submits that marriage of petitioner/wife was solemnized with the respondent/husband on 24.02.2012 in accordance with Hindu rites and customs and they have been blessed with two daughters, presently aged about 14 & 10 years. After birth of second daughter, the respondent/husband started harassing the petitioner/wife physically and mentally and ousted her along with her minor children from the matrimonial home. Therefore, she is residing with her parents along with her minor daughters at BINI PRADEEP Digitally signed by BINI PRADEEP Date: 2025.07.14 11:21:50 +0530 2 Dhamtari. He would further submit that in the maintenance case, Rs.6,000/- has been granted as maintenance in favour of the petitioner and her daughters, but the respondent has not paid a single penny till date, therefore, she filed application under Section 125(3) CrPC, which is pending consideration before the Family Court, Dhamtari. He further submits that the respondent/husband has filed divorce petition bearing Hindu Marriage Case No.26/2024 before District Judge, Bhanupratappur, Distt. North Bastar. He would next submit that to and fro distance between Dhamtari and Bhanupratappur is 210 Km and being mother of two minor daughters, it would be difficult for the petitioner to travel such distance to attend the Court proceeding of divorce case at Bhanupratappur. Rather if the divorce petition is transferred from the Court of District Judge, Bhanupratappur to Family Court, Dhamtari, then it would be convenient for the respondent/husband also as he can attend both the cases, hence, it is prayed that divorce petition filed by the husband bearing Hindu Marriage Case No.26/2024 be transferred from the Court of District Judge, Bhanupratapur to Family Court, Dhamtari. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent submits that distance between Dhamtari and Bhanupratappur is 105 Km and earlier TPC No.212/2024 filed by the petitioner was rejected by the Coordinate Bench vide Order dated 31.01.2025, therefore, subsequent TPC is also deserves to be rejected. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material placed on record. 5. In the matter of N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs. A.S. Saravana Karthik (2022 SCC Online SC 1199), their Lordships of the Supreme Court 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 3 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.” 6. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sumita Singh -v- Kumar Sanjay and another [(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 case of Rajani Kishor Pardeshi -v- Kishore Babulal Pardeshi [(2005) 12 SCC 237] has observed that the convenience of wife is to be preferred over the convenience of the husband. 7. At the outset, perusal of the Order dated 31.01.2025 passed in TPC No.212/2024 would show that earlier the respondent/husband had filed divorce petition before the Family Court, Kanker, which was returned to him for want of territorial jurisdiction. In between, the wife had filed aforesaid TPC, therefore, that TPC was rejected on account of order passed by the Family Court, Kanker, whereby divorce petition filed by the husband was directed to be returned to file in the Court of competent jurisdiction. In that view of the matter, the objection raised by counsel for the respondent is misconceived. 8. In the instant case, to and fro distance between Dhamtari and Bhanupratappur is 210 Km and the petitioner is mother of two minor daughters and it would be difficult for her to travel such distance. Further not paying the maintenance amount to the wife and children goes against the husband/respondent. 9. Considering the fact situation of the case and the distance between aforesaid two places and the respondent not paying the maintenance amount to the wife and children and further considering the aforecited case laws, wherein it has been observed that, in transfer of matrimonial cases, the wife’s convenience must be looked into, in the considered opinion of this Court, it is a fit case for transfer of the civil suit, as prayed for. 4 10. Accordingly, the instant transfer petition is allowed. It is ordered that divorce case bearing Hindu Marriage Case No.26/2024 pending before the Court of District Judge, Bhanupratappur, North Bastar, be transferred to Family Court, Dhamtari (CG) for its trial/ disposal in accordance with law. The District Judge, Bhanupratapur, Distt. North Bastar (CG) is directed to transmit the record of the above case to the Judge, Family Court, Dhamtari, within a period of 15 days. 11. Further, the Judge, Family Court, Dhamtari is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same expeditiously, preferably within a period of four months from the date of receipt of the record from transferring Court. The parties are also directed to cooperate with the concerned Family Court for early disposal of the case. 12. In view of above order, pending interim application, if any, stands disposed of. No order as to costs. Sd/- (Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge Bini