- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34345 CP No. 168 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA CIVIL PETITION NO.168 OF 2025 BETWEEN: SMT. HEMA SANDEEP SHENOY AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, W/O. SANDEEP SHENOY, R/AT NO.107, ARR COMFORTS, OPPOSITE TYRETEC, 18TH MAIN ROAD, 5TH PHASE, HAL II STAGE, INDIRANAGAR, BENGALURU-560008. …PETITIONER (BY SRI MOHAMMED ISHALUDDIN Z., ADVOCATE) AND: SRI SANDEEP SHENOY AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, S/O K. BALAKRISHNA SHENOY R/16-133D1, DWARAKA D-60, ANANTHNAGAR, IIND STAGE, MANIPAL-576104. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI AJITH A. SHETTY, ADVOCATE) THIS CIVIL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 24 OF THE CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE. 1908., PRAYING TO TRANSFER THE M.C.NO.48/2025 PENDING ON THE FILE OF PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT AT UDUPI TO THE FAMILY COURT AT BANGALORE, AND TO PASS ANY SUCH ORDER WHICH THIS HON’BLE COURT MAY DEEM FIT TO GRANT IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDERS WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by MAHALAKSHMI B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34345 CP No. 168 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA ORAL ORDER The present petition is filed by the wife seeking to transfer M.C.No.48/2025 initiated by the respondent- husband seeking divorce pending on the file of the Principal Judge, Family Court at Udupi to the Family Court at Bengaluru. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent and perused the material on record. 3. The marriage between the petitioner and respondent was solemnized on 29.08.2018, as per the customs prevailing in their community. The petitioner and the respondent are blessed with a child, aged about 4 years, who is in the care and custody of the petitioner. Due to un-cordial relationship they are residing separately for quite some time. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34345 CP No. 168 of 2025 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is residing at Bengaluru and living along with her sister and her minor child, who is aged about 4 years. The travel distance between Bengaluru to Udupi is around 395 kilometers, making it difficult for the petitioner-wife to attend the proceedings initiated by the respondent-husband at Udupi. 5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent submits that the respondent has instituted the petition at Udupi and being the dominus litis, has the prerogative to chose the forum, where he resides to proceed against the opposite party. It is further submitted that the respondent has been suffering from ailments since 2022, and therefore, if the matter is transferred to Bengaluru as sought by the petitioner, it would cause him great inconvenience owing to the distance and difficulty in travel. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34345 CP No. 168 of 2025 6. In matrimonial cases, when the wife invokes Section 24 of CPC, the cardinal principle is the convenience of the wife rather than the inconvenience caused to the husband. The plea of inconvenience raised by the respondent cannot by itself be a ground to resist transfer, particularly when no supporting medical records or other material particulars have been placed on record to substantiate the alleged ailment since 2022. The fact remains that the petitioner is residing at Bengaluru, with a minor child, travel distance from Bengaluru to Udupi is around 395 kms, causing great inconvenience and hardship to the petitioner. 7. In similar circumstances, the Apex Court in the case of N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs. A.S.Saravana Karthik Sha1 (Aishwarya) has held at paragraph No.9 which reads as under: “9. The cardinal principle for exercise of power under Section 24 of the Code of Civil 1 Civil Appeal No.4894/2022 - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34345 CP No. 168 of 2025 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.” 8. For the foregoing reasons, this Court pass the following: ORDER i. The Civil Petition is allowed. ii. M.C.No.48/2024 pending on the file of Principal Judge, Family Court, Udupi is withdrawn and - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34345 CP No. 168 of 2025 transferred to Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru. iii. The Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru to assign M.C.No.48/2024 to appropriate Court. iv. The parties shall appear before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru, on 19.09.2025 without waiting for further notice. Sd/- _____________________ JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA AT List No.: 1 Sl No.: 27