1 2025:CGHC:45051 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR TPC No. 111 of 2025 Smt. Anjali Sahu @ Chanchal Sahu W/o Yashwant Sahu, D/o Shri Kashiram Sahu Aged About 26 Years Presently R/o C/o Shri Mohan Sahu, House No. 349, Rajiv Gandhinagar, Jute Mill, Raigarh C.G. ... Petitioner versus Yashwant Sahu S/o Late Ravishankar Sahu Aged About 26 Years Presently Residing At Quarter No. Super E-491, C.S.E.B. Colony East, Near Gayatri Shakti Peeth, Kosabadi Korba, District Korba C.G. ... Respondent {Cause title is taken from Case Information System} For Petitioner : Mr. Hari Agrawal, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr. Vikash Kumar Pandey, Advocate. {Hon’ble Mr. Justice Mr. Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Order on Board 03/09/2025 Heard. 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. 57-A/2025 (Yashwant Sahu vs. Anjali Sahu @ Chanchal Sahu) pending before the Family Court, Korba, District Korba (C.G.) to Family Court, Raigarh (C.G.). 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner /wife would submit that marriage of petitioner/wife was solemnized with respondent / husband on 2 30.03.2024 as per Hindu rites and rituals, thereafter, she is residing alongwith her husband and his family members at Korba. After sometime of the marriage, due to harassment meted out to the petitioner / wife by respondent / husband in connection with demand of dowry, she was compelled to leave apart after May, 2025, hence, she is residing alongwith her parents at Raigarh. It is further submitted that respondent/husband has filed divorce petition bearing Civil Suit No. 57-A/2025 (Yashwant Sahu vs. Anjali Sahu) before Family Court, Korba and petitioner/wife has filed an application under Section 144 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (henceforth “BNSS, 2023”) for grant of maintenance before the Family Court, Raigarh bearing Criminal M.J.C. No. F 67/2025 (Smt. Anjali Sahu @ Chanchal Sahu vs. Yashwant Sahu), in which, respondent/husband has entered his appearance, therefore, if divorce petition filed by respondent/husband is transferred from Family Court, Korba to Famiy Court, Raigarh, then it would be convenient for respondent / husband also, as he could appear in both the cases at Raigarh Court, hence, it is prayed that transfer petitioner may be allowed and divorce petition bearing Civil Suit No. 57-A/2025 pending before the Family Court, Korba may be transferred to Family Court, Raigarh. 3. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for respondent/ husband would submit that although distance between Korba to Raigarh is about 120 kms and there is direct bus connectivity in these two places, hence, it would not be difficult for the petitioner/wife to attend hearing of divorce case pending before Family Court, Korba. He further submits that the petitioner/wife without assigning any sufficient reason has left the company of respondent/husband, rather she compelled her husband to leave apart from her mother and sisters whereas respondent/husband is alone earning member in his family and he 3 has been obtained employment in SECL on compassionate ground on account of death of his father, hence, 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. 5. The ground taken for the transfer of divorce case is that one maintenance case filed by the petitioner / wife in respect of both the parties are pending before the Family Court, Raigarh, therefore, it would be convenient for both the parties, if divorce case bearing Civil Suit No.57-A/2025 filed by respondent / husband before the Family Court, Korba be transferred to Family Court, Raigarh, rather it would not cause any difficulty for the husband, as he has to go in the hearing of aforesaid two cases filed by the petitioner/wife in the Court at Raigarh 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 4 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 the Civil Suit No. 57-A/2025 (Yashwant Sahu vs. Anjali Sahu @ Chanchal Sahu) pending before the Family Court, Korba, District Korba (C.G.) be transferred to Family Court, Raigarh 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 Judge, Family Court, Raigarh, within a period of 15 days. 10. It is further directed that that Family Court, Raigarh 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 11:36:51 +0530 5