921-MCA-151-2025 (C).docx IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 151 OF 2025 Rajshree Ashutosh Patil … Applicant Versus Ashutosh Vijaysingh Patil … Respondent ---- Mr. Rushikesh C. Barge a/w. Mr. Viren Ghatge for the Applicant. ------- Coram : ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J. Date : 28th August 2026. PER COURT : 1. Heard Mr. Rushikesh Barge, learned Advocate for the Applicant. 2. By the present Application filed under Section 24 of the Civil Procedure Code 1908, the Applicant has sought for the following substantive relief in terms of prayer clause (A): “(A) That this Honourable Court be pleased to transfer the Hindu Marriage Petition No. 186 of 2019 tiled under Section 13(1) (i-a) (i- b) Hindu Marriage Act pending before Family Court Solapur from the Family Court Solapur, to Civil Judge, Senior Division, Baramati.” osk 1 of 4 921-MCA-151-2025 (C).docx 3. Mr. Rushikesh Barge, learned Advocate for the Applicant, states that the notice in this Application was issued to the Respondent on 25th April 2025, on which day the Applicant was granted ad-interim relief in terms of prayer clause (B). He further states that the Respondent was served with the said notice. He states that this Court again issued notice to the Respondent on 11th March 2026 after this Application was transferred to the Circuit Bench at Kolhapur. He states that the second notice was also served on the Respondent and therefore the service in this Application is complete. 4. The Office Note dated 13th August 2025 indicates that the Respondent was served with the first notice. The Office Note dated 21st May 2026 indicates that the Respondent was served with the second notice issued by this Court. The Sheristedar called out the name of the Respondent-Ashutosh Vijaysingh Patil. Neither the Respondent nor any Advocate for the Respondent was present, either in person or via V.C. mode. 5. Mr. Rushikesh Barge, learned Advocate for the Applicant, states that the Applicant (wife) is residing with her minor daughter, aged 15 years, at Baramati. He submits that the Applicant is working as a Principal at Vidya Pratishthan College, Baramati. He submits that on account of her employment and the responsibility of the minor daughter, it is inconvenient for the Applicant to attend and pursue the matrimonial proceedings bearing osk 2 of 4 921-MCA-151-2025 (C).docx Hindu Marriage Petition No. 186 of 2019, filed by the Respondent (husband) before the Family Court at Solapur. He submits that Solapur is far from Baramati. He therefore submits that on account of the inconvenience caused to the Applicant in attending the proceedings at Solapur, the Applicant has made the present request for transfer of the said proceedings to the Court at Baramati. 6. Despite being served, the Respondent has chosen to remain absent. Thus, it appears that the Respondent is not interested in contesting the Applicant's transfer request. 7. In the case of N.C.V. Aishwarya vs. A.S. Saravana Karthik Sha1, in para No. 9, it has been observed as under:- “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- 1 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1199 osk 3 of 4 921-MCA-151-2025 (C).docx economic paradigm in the Indian society, generally, it is the wife’s convenience which must be looked at while considering transfer.” 8. Considering the statements in this Application, the inconvenience stated by the Applicant in attending the Family Court at Solapur, the facts and the submissions made by Mr. Rushikesh Barge, learned Advocate for the Applicant, which remain unrebutted due to the Respondent's absence, this Application is allowed. 9. Consequently, the Hindu Marriage Petition No. 186 of 2019, pending before the Family Court at Solapur, is withdrawn and is transferred to the Civil Judge Senior Division at Baramati, having jurisdiction to try family and marital disputes. 10. The Principal District Judge, Pune, is requested to assign Hindu Marriage Petition No. 186 of 2019 to the Civil Court at Baramati, which has jurisdiction to try family and marital disputes. 11. Mr. Rushikesh Barge, learned Advocate for the Applicant states that a copy of this order would be placed before the Principal District Judge, Pune. 12. Misc. Civil Application No. 151 of 2025 is allowed. [ ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J. ] osk 4 of 4 OMKAR SHIVAHAR KUMBHAKARN Digitally signed by OMKAR SHIVAHAR KUMBHAKARN Date: 2026.08.31 12:17:50 +0530