1 2025:CGHC:53523 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR TPC No. 137 of 2025 Smt. Jyoti Verma W/o Roshan Kumar Verma Aged About 39 Years R/o Nikhileshwaram Colony, P.S. Sarkanda, Bilaspur District - Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh) ... Petitioner. Versus Roshan Kumar Verma S/o Shri Nohar Singh Verma Aged About 41 Years R/o L.I.G. - 54, Deendayal Awas Patan P.S. Patan, Tehsil - Patan Zila Durg (Chhattisgarh) ... Respondent. For Petitioner : Mr. Rahul Kumar, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr. Rakesh Kumar Thakur, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Justice Deepak Kumar Tiwari Order On Board 03/11/2025 1. This Petition has been filed under Section 24 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 by the petitioner/wife seeking transfer of Matrimonial Case No.402/2024 (Roshan Kumar Verma Vs. Smt. Jyoti Verma) from the Family Court Durg, District Durg (CG) to Family Court, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur. Digitally signed by AJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI DN: cn=AJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, ou=HIGH COURT, o=HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, st=Chhattisgarh, c=IN Date: 2025.11.04 10:28:58 +0530 2 2. The marriage between the parties was solemnized on 21.05.2011 and out of such relation a daughter was born on 23.01.2023. After some time, the dispute arose between the parties due to which the petitioner has filed complaint against the respondent before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bilaspur. Subsequently, the respondent/husband has filed an application under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act before the Family Court, Durg for restitution of conjugal rights and the petitioner is seeking transfer of said case to Family Court, Bilaspur. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is living with her school going child at Bilaspur and she is facing difficulties to travel to Family Court, Durg to attend each and every hearing of the case. Therefore, the case of the respondent may be transferred to Family Court, Bilaspur for the convenience of the wife to participate in the proceedings. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent would oppose the aforesaid prayer. 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and also perused the documents annexed with the petition. 6. In the matter of N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs. A.S. Saravana Karthik (2022 SCC Online SC 1199) the Hon’ble Supreme Court has observed that generally it is wife’s convenience which must be looked at while considering transfer. The relevant portion of the aforesaid judgment is reproduced hereunder:- "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 3 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. 10.Further, when two or more proceedings are pending in different Courts between the same parties which raise common question of fact and law, and when the decisions in the cases are interdependent, it is desirable that they should be tried together by the same Judge so as to avoid multiplicity in trial of the same issues and conflict of decisions.” 7. Having regard the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and in view of the aforesaid settled principle, this Court is inclined to allow the prayer made by the petitioner. 8. Consequently, the Transfer Petition is allowed and it is ordered that Case No.402/2024 pending before Family Court, Durg be transferred to the Family Court, Bilaspur for its trial/disposal in accordance with law. 9. Both the parties shall remain present before the Family Court, Bilaspur on 08.12.2025. 10. The respondent/husband would be at liberty to participate in the proceedings through video conferencing/virtually unless otherwise directed by the concerned Court. 11. Pending application, if any, also stand disposed of. Sd/- /-Sd/-Sd (Deepak Kumar Tiwari) Judge Ajay