1 2025:CGHC:8949 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR TPC No. 17 of 2025 1 - Smt. Akansha Mishra W/o Sh. Anant Mishra Aged About 30 Years D/o Sh. Ambika Prasad Tiwari, At Shukrawari Bazar, Gudhiyari, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus 1 - Anant Mishra S/o Sh. Premshankar Mishra Aged About 34 Years R/o At Mahesh Colony Janki Niwas, H. No. 685, Durg, District Durg, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Vinay Nagdev, Adv. For Respondent : Mr. Anmol Sharma, Adv. (Hon’ble Mr. Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi, J) Order on Board 20-2-2025. 1 Applicant/wife has preferred this TPC under Section 24 of the Civil Procedure Code (in short 'CPC') for transfer of Civil Suit No. 1095/2024 (Anant Mishra Vs. Smt. Akansha Mishra) pending before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Durg to a court of competent jurisdiction at Raipur (CG). 2 Learned counsel for the applicant/wife submits that marriage of applicant/wife and respondent/husband was solemnized on 23-5-2020 and they have been blessed with a girl child, presently aged about 2 years. After delivery of girl child, the respondent started harassing her and ousted her Digitally signed by AVANISH KUMAR PATHAK Date: 2025.02.21 14:38:29 +0530 2 from her matrimonial house, only because of delivery of girl child. He also used to say that prior to marriage, she was having relations with various persons. Thereafter, she is residing with her parents at Raipur. Learned counsel further submits that respondent/husband has filed an application under Section 9 of the hindu Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal rights bearing Civil Suit No. 1095/2024 before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Durg. Distance between Raipur to Durg is about 30 to 35 km, but being mother of a girl child aged about 2 years, it would be difficult for her to go to Durg to attend hearing in aforesaid suit. Therefore, the aforesaid civil suit be transferred from Durg to Raipur. 3 On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent/ husband submits that the husband is suffering from Hernia and he has undergone surgery twice. Recently, he has undergone surgery on 13-8-2024. It is further submitted that, distance between Raipur to Durg is only about 30 to 35 km. and there is frequent conveyance facility between these two places. Hence, it would not be difficult for the applicant to travel from Raipur to Durg to attend court proceeding. He also submits that, respondent is ready to pay pendente lite expenditure to the applicant. Hence the instant TPC may be rejected. 4 Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available in the transfer petition and the relevant provisions. 5 Though distance between Raipur to Durg is not too much, as it is only about 35 km, but in the opinion of this Court, travelling from Raipur to Durg with a two years girl child may cause hardship for the applicant/wife. 3 6 Hon'ble Apex Court in N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs. A.S. Saravana Karthik reported in 2022 SCC Online SC 1199 held at paras 9 which reads as under:- "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 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.” 7 Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Sumita Singh Versus Kumar Sanjay and another reported in 2001 10 SCC 41 has observed that if husband files suit against wife, then convenience of wife must be looked into. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Rajani Kishor Pardeshi Versus Kishore Babulal Pardeshi reported in (2005) 12 SCC 237 has observed that the convenience of wife is to be preferred over the convenience of the husband. 8 Considering the aforesaid facts of the case and considering the aforecited case laws, wherein it has been observed that, in transfer of matrimonial cases, the wife's convenience must be looked into, in the considered opinion of this Court, it is a fit case for transfer of the civil suit, as prayed for. 4 9 Consequently, the instant transfer petition is allowed. It is ordered that the Civil Suit No. 1095/2024 (Anant Mishra Vs. Smt. Akansha Mishra) pending before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Durg (CG) be transferred to the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Raipur (CG) for its trial/disposal in accordance with law. 10 The Principal Judge, Family Court, Durg (C.G.) is directed to transmit the record of the aforesaid case to the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Raipur within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt/submission of copy of this order. After receiving the case on transfer, the transferee Court is directed to consider and decide the case as early as possible, preferably within a further period of four months from the date of receipt of the record from the transferring Court. 11 In view of above order, pending interim application(s), if any, stands disposed of. No order as to cost(s). Sd/- (Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge Pathak