1 2025:CGHC:33713 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR TPC No. 13 of 2025 1 - Kavita Baghel W/o Prakant Baghel Aged About 36 Years R/o Daubandhan, Bilaigarh, District- Sarangarh- Bilaigarh ( C.G.). --- Applicant versus 1 - Prakant Baghel S/o Khulan Prasad Aged About 35 Years R/o Vijrakanpa, Lalpur, District- Mungeli ( C.G. ). --- Respondent For applicant : Mr. Punit Ruparel, Adv. For Respondent : Mr. Rakesh Kumar Manikpuri, Adv. (Hon’ble Mr. Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi, J) Order on Board 17-7-2025 1 Applicant/wife has preferred this TPC under Section 24 of the Civil Procedure Code (in short 'CPC') for transfer of Civil Suit No. 14-A/2024 (Prakant Baghel Vs. Kavita Baghel) pending before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Mungeli, Distt. Mungeli (CG) to Family Court, Raigarh (CG). 2 Learned counsel for the applicant/wife submits that, marriage of applicant/wife and respondent/husband was solemnized on 5-6-2015 and they have been blessed with two children i.e. a daughter, aged about 8½ years and a son, aged about 7½ years. Subsequently, because of cruelty meted out to the applicant by the respondent, she has left his company and presently she and her children are residing at Bilaigarh, District Sarangarh- Bilaigarh. Applicant/wife is working as Teacher and posted at Bilaigarh. Learned counsel further submits that, an application under Section 9 of the Digitally signed by AVANISH KUMAR PATHAK Date: 2025.07.18 14:51:00 +0530 2 Hindu Marriage Act was filed by the respondent/husband bearing Civil Suit No. 18-A/2022, which was transferred from the Court of District Judge, Mungeli to the Family Court, Raigarh, vide order dated 4-11-2024 passed by this Court in TPC No. 78/2023. He further submits that respondent/husband has filed divorce petition bearing Civil Suit No. 14-A/2024 before the Family Court, Mungeli. The applicant is mother of two minor children. One case is also pending between the parties at Family Court, Raigarh, distance from Bilaigarh to Mungeli is more than 150 km, therefore, it would be difficult for the applicant to travel from Bilaigarh to Mungeli to attend Court proceeding. Hence, it is submitted that the divorce petition may be transferred from Mungeli to Raigarh, which is nearest place to Bilaigarh. 3 Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent submits that, respondent/husband is posted as Agriculture Extension Officer, Mungeli, therefore, if the divorce petition is transferred, then it would be difficult for him to attend proceeding at Raigarh. He further submits, if the case is transferred, then it may be transferred to the Family Court, Bilaspur, which is the mid place between Bilaigarh to Mungeli. 4 Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available in the transfer petition and the relevant provisions. 5 Grounds taken by the applicant for transfer of the divorce petition filed by the husband are that, she is residing with her two children at Bilaigarh, where she is posted as a Teacher, distance between Bilaigarh to Mungeli is about 300 km. to and fro, therefore, it would be difficult for her being mother of two minor children residing with her, to travel such a long 3 distance to attend court proceeding at Mungeli, further one case under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act filed by the husband at Mungeli has already been transferred to Family Court, Raigarh and the divorce petition has been filed by the respondent/husband. 6 Hon'ble Apex Court in N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs. A.S. Saravana Karthik reported in 2022 SCC Online SC 1199 held at paras 9 which reads 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 Versus Kumar Sanjay and another reported in 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 Versus Kishore Babulal Pardeshi reported in (2005) 12 SCC 237 has observed that the convenience of wife is to be preferred over the convenience of the husband. 8 Considering the aforesaid facts of the case and considering the aforecited case laws, wherein it has been observed that, in transfer of 4 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. 9 Consequently, the instant transfer petition is allowed. It is ordered that Civil Suit No. 14-A/2024 (Prakant Baghel Vs. Kavita Baghel) pending before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Mungeli, Distt. Mungeli (CG) be transferred to Family Court, Raigarh (CG) for its trial/disposal in accordance with law. 10 The Principal Judge, Family Court, Mungeli, Distt. Mungeli (CG) is directed to transmit the record of the aforesaid case to the Family Court, Raigah (C.G.), within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt/submission of copy of this order. It is further observed that after receiving the case on transfer, the transferee Court is directed to consider and decide the case as early as possible, preferably within a further period of four months from the date of receipt of the record from the transferring Court. 11 In view of above order, pending interlocutory application(s), if any, stands disposed of. No order as to costs. Sd/- (Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge Pathak