- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38307 CP No. 58 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.58 OF 2025 BETWEEN: SMT. MEGHA W/O PRAKASH S. KARADI AGED 37 YEARS, NO.1985/1, 3RD FLOOR, C BLOCK, V T C, SAHAKARNAGAR, BANGALORE-560092. …PETITIONER (BY SRI MALLIKARJUNA R. MADAWAL, ADVOCATE) AND: SRI PRAKASH S. KARADI S/O SHIVAYYA V. KARADI AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/AT “SHIVAPARVATHI”, 2ND CROSS, TBH COLONY, KUD ROAD, DHARWAD-580001. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI ARAVINDA GOWDA PATIL N.P., ADVOCATE) THIS CIVIL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 24 OF THE CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE, 1908 PRAYING TO WITHDRAW THE CASE FILED BY THE RESPONDENT AGAINST THE PETITIONER IN M.C.NO.9/2025 PENDING ON THE FILE OF HON’BLE PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, DHARWAD AND TRANSFER THE SAME TO THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, BANGALORE FOR PROPER ADJUDICATION AND GRANT LITIGATION EXPENSES OF THIS PETITION, COSTS SUCH OTHER RELIEF AS THIS HON’BLE COURT DEEMS FIT, UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by MAHALAKSHMI B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38307 CP No. 58 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA ORAL ORDER The present petition is filed by the wife seeking to withdraw and transfer M.C.No.09/2025, instituted by the respondent-husband seeking restitution of conjugal rights by invoking provisions under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (‘Act’ for short), pending on the file of the Principal Judge, Family Court, Dharwad to Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent. 3. The marriage between the petitioner and respondent was solemnized on 09.12.2012, as per the customs prevailing in their community. From the wedlock they have blessed with a male child. Due to un-cordial relationship the parties are residing separately for quite some time. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38307 CP No. 58 of 2025 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner resides in Bengaluru along with her minor son, aged about 10 years, who is studying there. She has also filed Crl.Misc.No.213/2024 before VI Metropolitan Magistrate Traffic Court, Bengaluru by invoking provisions under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. The case filed by the respondent-husband at Dharwad is alleged to be a counterblast. It is further submitted that the travel distance between Bengaluru and Dharwad is about 420 kilometers one way, compelling the petitioner to travel particularly when she has responsibility of a minor child, would cause undue hardship and great inconvenience to the petitioner. 5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent contends that the petitioner’s plea of inconvenience lacks merit since she had earlier failed to appear even before the Bengaluru Court when the matter was listed for - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38307 CP No. 58 of 2025 Mediation. According to him, her conduct shows that the plea of hardship is only a tactic to harass the respondent. 6. This Court has carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record. 7. It is a cardinal principle underlying matrimonial matters that, when the wife seeks transfer of proceedings by invoking the provisions of Section 24 of CPC, the paramount consideration is the convenience of the wife, rather than the inconvenience that may be caused to the husband. 8. It is not in dispute that the petitioner resides in Bengaluru with her minor son and has instituted proceedings therein Crl.Misc.No.213/2024. The travel distance of approximately 420 kilometers one way to Dharwad, coupled with her responsibility to care for a minor child would indeed causes undue hardship and great inconvenience to the petitioner. The respondent’s objection, based on her earlier non-appearance before the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38307 CP No. 58 of 2025 Mediation Centre at Bengaluru, cannot outweigh the hardship she would face if compelled to travel repeatedly to Dharwad. 9. 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 transfer under Section 24 of CPC, in matrimonial matters Courts must weigh the economic and social circumstances of the parties. 10. For the foregoing reasons, Civil Petition warrants acceptance and this Court pass the following: ORDER i. The Civil Petition is allowed. 1Civil Appeal No.4894/2022 - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38307 CP No. 58 of 2025 ii. M.C.No.09/2025 pending on the file of the Principal Judge, Family Court, Dharwad is withdrawn and transferred to the Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru. iii. The parties shall appear before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru on 29.10.2025 without waiting for further notice. iv. The Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru to assign the matter to appropriate Court. Sd/- _____________________ JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA AT List No.: 1 Sl No.: 23