1 2025:CGHC:45052 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR TPC No. 105 of 2025 Nirma Toppo W/o Shri Puneshwar Sahu, Aged About 36 Years R/o Ward No. 18, Cseb Colony, Patharripara, Korba, District Korba, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner versus Puneshar Sahu S/o Shri Bhaiya Ram Sahu, Aged About 30 Years R/o Village Chindii Birhi, Police Station Dongargaon, Post Kapa, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent {Cause title is taken from Case Information System} For Petitioner : Mr. Ashutosh Trivedi & Mr. Pritendra Chouhan, Adv. For Respondent : Mr. Rudranath Mukherjee, Advocate. (Hon’ble Mr. Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Order on Board 03/09/2025 1. Petitioner/wife has preferred this transfer petition under Section 24 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (henceforth 'CPC') for transfer of Civil Suit No.112-A/2025 (Puneshar Sahu Vs. Nirma Toppo) pending before Principal Judge, Family Court, Rajnandgaon (C.G.) to Family Court, Korba (C.G.) 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner /wife would submit that marriage of petitioner/wife was solemnized with respondent / husband on 14.04.2022 at Arya Samaj Temple, Raipur, it was second marriage of petitioner/wife. He further submits that after few months of marriage, their 2 relation became sour, therefore, the petitioner/wife was compelled to leave apart, as such, she is residing separately from her husband/respondent. It is further submitted that respondent/husband has filed divorce petition bearing Civil Suit No. 112-A/2025 before Family Court, Rajnandgaon, but the petitioner/wife is permanent resident of District Korba and presently she is posted at Janjgir Champa as Police Constable and respondent/husband is also posted at police constable at District Kondagaon. It is next submitted that distance between Rajnandgaon to Janjgir-Champa, where the petitioner is presently posted, is more than 250 kms. Further, the petitioner/wife is mother of two minor children, aged about 11 years & 8 years, respectively, who have born from her first husband, therefore, it would be difficult for her (petitioner) to travel more than 250 kms i.e. from Janjgir-Champa to Rajnandgaon to attend hearing of the divorce case filed by the respondent / husband, therefore, as such, he submits that the transfer petition may be allowed and Civil Suit No. 112-A/2025 (Puneshwar Sahu vs. Nirma Toppo) pending before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Rajnandgaon (C.G.) may be transferred to Principal Judge, Family Court, Korba. 3. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for respondent/ husband would submit that though distance between Rajnandgaon to Korba is about 250 kms, but there is direct train connectivity between aforesaid two places, hence, it would not be difficult for the petitioner/ wife to attend hearing of divorce case pending before Family Court, Rajnandgaon, therefore, the transfer petition is liable to be dismissed. 4. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material available on record. 3 5. Having regard to the fact that distance between Rajnandgaon to Korba is about 500 kms. to and fro, being police constable posted at Janjgir-Champa and mother of two minor children, it would be difficult for petitioner/wife to travel from Janjgir-Champa to Rajnandgaon to attend the hearing of Civil Suit No. 112-A/2025 filed by the respondent/husband seeking divorce from petitioner/wife, instant transfer petition filed by the petitioner/wife deserves to be allowed. 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 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. 4 8. Considering the fact 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.112-A/2025 (Puneshar Sahu Vs. Nirma Toppo) pending before Principal Judge, Family Court, Rajnandgaon (C.G.) be transferred to the Family Court, Korba for its trial/ disposal in accordance with law. The Family Court, Rajnandgaon is directed to transmit the record of the above case to the Family Court, Korba within a period of 15 days. 10. It is further directed that that Family Court, Korba shall expedite the trial and conclude the same expeditiously preferably within period of four months from the date of receipt of the record from transferring Court. 11. 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: 2025.09.08 11:45:27 +0530 5