- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38220 CP No. 200 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA CIVIL PETITION NO. 200 OF 2025 BETWEEN: 1. MRS MANYATHA W/O MR. VISHWAS MP, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.202, SAMARPAN VIEW, BOLPU GUPPE, MARY HILL HELIPAD, KAVUR POST OFFICE, DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT - 575 015 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. AJAY KUMAR N., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MR. VISHWAS M P S/O MR. PREMACHANDRA M V, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, RESIDING AT DOOR NO.85, PANCHAVATI CIRCLE, V V MOHALLA, MYSURU DISTRICT - 570 004 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. AKARSH KUMAR GOWDA., ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by MAHALAKSHMI B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38220 CP No. 200 of 2025 THIS CIVIL PETITION FILED UNDER SEC. 24 OF THE CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE. 1908., PRAYING TO TRANSFER MC NO.1157/2024 PENDING BEFORE THE HONBLE PRL, JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, MYSURU (ANNEXURE A AND B), TO THE HONBLE FAMILY COURT AT MANGALURU. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA ORAL ORDER 1. The present petition is filed by the wife seeking to withdraw and transfer M.C.No.1175/2024, instituted by the respondent-husband seeking for dissolution of marriage, pending on the file of the Family Court, Mysuru to the Family Court, Mangaluru. 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the respondent. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is presently residing at Mangaluru. Though her employer's office is located at Bangalore, with - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38220 CP No. 200 of 2025 the consent of her employer and as per terms of the Employment Verification Letter, she is presently working from home from Mangaluru (Dakshina Kannada) at the above mentioned address. It is further submitted that whenever her physical presence is required, she travels to Bengaluru in co- ordination with her employer, as stated in the letter dated 19.09.2025. 4. It is also submitted that the respondent is engaged in civil contract works at the Centre for Continuing Technical Education (Polytechnic), Mangaluru and the letter evidencing completion of such work is produced as per Annexure-C. Further it is submitted that the travel distance between Mangaluru and Mysore is about 250 kms, and such long distance travel would cause hardship and great inconvenience to the petitioner. 5. Per contra, learned counsel contends that the petitioner is residing and employed at Bengaluru, - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38220 CP No. 200 of 2025 whereas the respondent is residing and working at Mysuru. 6. The letter dated 19.09.2025 produced by the petitioner is subsequent to the filing of the petition, and therefore, cannot be given due weightage. 7. It is submitted that the petitioner has not made out any sufficient ground for transfer of the case from Mysuru to Mangaluru, more particularly, her employment is based at Bengaluru. 8. This Court has carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record. 9. The marriage between the petitioner and the respondent was solemnized on 15.04.2022 as per Hindu customs and rituals. Due to an un-cordial relationship between them, they are residing separately for quite some time. Though the petitioner is employed with her office located at Bengaluru, with her employer’s consent she has been permitted - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38220 CP No. 200 of 2025 to work from home at Mangaluru. The record also discloses that the respondent has undertaken a project at Mangaluru. The travel distance between Mangaluru and Mysuru is approximately 250 kms, which would be burdensome and cause hardship to the petitioner. 10. The cardinal principle as laid down in the catena of judgments in line is that in matrimonial cases where the wife seeks to invoke Section 24 of CPC, the convenience of the wife is paramount consideration rather than the inconvenience caused to the husband. 11. The Apex Court in the case of N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs. A.S.Saravana Karthik Sha1(Aishwarya) has held that, the ends of justice should demand the transfer and, given the prevailing socioeconomic paradigm, generally the wife's convenience must be looked at while considering a 1Civil Appeal No.4894/2022 - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38220 CP No. 200 of 2025 transfer under Section 24 of CPC, in matrimonial matters Courts must weigh the economic and social circumstances of the parties. 12. For the foregoing reasons, CP warrants acceptance and this Court pass the following: ORDER ii) The Civil Petition is allowed. ii) M.C.No.1175/2024, pending on the file of the Family Court, Mysore, is withdrawn and transferred to the Family Court at Mangaluru. iii) Parties to appear before the Family Court, Mangaluru, on 24.10.2025 without waiting for further notice. Sd/- _______________________ JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA SSB