Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 3148 (CHH)

SMT. SANGEETA DEWANGAN v. MURARI LAL DEWANGAN

TPC/5/2025 · 2025-02-19

Shri Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi

Transfer Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:8741 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR TPC No. 5 of 2025 Smt. Sangeeta Dewangan W/o Murari Lal Dewangan Aged About 29 Years D/o Rajaram Dewangan, Aged About 29 Years, At Present- R/o Katiyapara, Near Sai Mandir, Juna Bilaspur, Distt.- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus Murari Lal Dewangan S/o Balaram Dewangan Aged About 33 Years R/o Qt. No. M-41, Ompur, Rajgamar, Korba, Tahsil And Distt.- Korba (Chhattisgarh) ... Respondent For Petitioner : Mr. Keshav Dewangan, Advocate. For Respondent : None present, though served. Hon'ble Mr. Justice Naresh Kumar. Chandravanshi Order On Board 19-02-2025 Heard. 1. Petitioner wife has preferred this transfer petition under Section 24 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 for transfer of Civil Suit No. 224-A/2023 (Murari Lal Dewangan vs. Smt. Sangeeta Dewangan) pending before Principal Judge, Family Court, Korba (C.G.) to the Family Court, Bilaspur (C.G.). 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/wife submits that marriage of petitioner/wife was solemnized with the respondent/husband 2 on 27.04.2015 as per Hindu rites and rituals. After marriage, they resided together for about 8 years. They have been blessed with two children, aged about 7 years & 4 years, respectively. It is submitted that since respondent / husband developed illicit ration with other girl, therefore, he started quarreling with petitioner/wife and compelled her to leave apart, hence, she is residing alongwith her parents at Bilaspur. It is next submitted that respondent / husband has filed an application under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 before Principal Judge, Family Court, Korba, District Korba bearing Civil Suit No. 224-A/2023. Distance between Korba to Bilaspur is 100 kms., though there is direct connectively between these two places by bus & Train, but being mother of two minor children, aged about 7 years & 4 years, respectively, it would be difficult for the petitioner/wife to go to Korba to attend the hearing of aforesaid civil suit. It is next contended that one maintenance case bearing Misc. Criminal Case No. 316 /2024 is pending before Family Court, Bilaspur against the respondent/hsband and another application under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 filed by the petitioner/wife bearing MJC (Criminal) No. 730 / 2024 is also pending in the court of District & Sessions Judge, Bilaspur against the respondent/husband, therefore, it is prayed that this petition may be allowed and Civil Suit No. 224-A/2023 (Murari Lal Dewangan vs. Smt. Sangeeta Dewangan) pending before Family Court, Korba may be transferred to Family Court, Bilaspur. 3. Despite service of notice, neither respondent/husband present nor represented by any counsel. 3 4. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the material available on record. 5. Having regard to the fact that distance between Korba to Bilaspur is about 100 kms., being mother of two minor children, aged about 7 years & four years, it would be difficult for petitioner/wife to travel from Bilaspur (C.G.) to Korba (C.G) to attend the hearing of aforesaid civil suit. Further, two cases are already pending against the respondent/husband in the Court of Bilaspur, therefore, respondent/husband has to go to attend hearing in that cases, as such, it would not cause any difficulty to the respondent/husband, if application under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 filed by the respondent/husband before Principal Judge, Family Court, Korba, District Korba bearing Civil Suit No. 224-A/2023 be transferred to Family Court, Bilaspur. 6. 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 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 4 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.” 7. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter 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 matter 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. 8. Considering the facts situation of the case, which has been observed in preceding paragraphs of his order and in light of the principles of law laid down by the Apex Court in aforecited cases; it is a fit case for transfer of the civil suit, as prayed for. 9. Consequently, the instant transfer petition is allowed. It is ordered that Civil Suit No. 224-A/2023 (Murari Lal Dewangan vs. Smt. Sangeeta Dewangan) pending before Principal Judge, Family Court, Korba (C.G.) be transferred to the Family Court, Bilaspur (C.G.) for its trial/ disposal in accordance with law. Family Court, Korba is directed to transmit the record of the above case to the court of Family Court, Bilaspur within a period of 15 days. 10. It is further directed that the Family Court, Bilaspur is directed to expedite the trial an conclude the same expeditiously preferably with a 5 period of four months from the date of receipt of the record from transferring Court. 11. In view of above order, pending interim application, if any, stands disposed of. No order as to costs. Sd/- (Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge Amit/- AMIT KUMAR DUBEY Digitally signed by AMIT KUMAR DUBEY Date: 2025.02.24 11:30:06 +0530