- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14975 CP No. 100164 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C M JOSHI CIVIL PETITION NO. 100164 OF 2025 BETWEEN: SMT. SHASHIKALA @ PANKAJA W/O. MANOJ PAI, AGE: 37 YEARS, OCC. NIL, R/AT. HOUSE NO.18, KALIDAS NAGAR, VIDYANAGAR, HUBBALLI, DIST. DHARWAD-580021. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. MOT GOURISHANKAR HARISHCHANDRA, ADVOCATE) AND: SHRI MANOJ S/O. GURUDATH PAI, AGE: 44 YEARS, OCC. PRIVATE JOB, R/AT. H.NO.17, 1ST CROSS, HASMAT COLLEGE, NORTH BANGALORE, KALYAN NAGAR, BANGALORE-560043. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. AJAY PRABHU M., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. MAHAMMADALI, ADVOCATE) THIS CIVIL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 24 OF CPC, PRAYING TO TRANSFER THE MC NO.5183/2020 AS PENDING BEFORE THE HON’BLE OF III ADDITIONAL PRINCIPAL JUDGE FAMILY COURT AT BANGALORE TO THE HON’BLE PRINCIPAL JUDGE FAMILY COURT AT HUBBALLI AND DIRECT TO DISPOSE OF THE CASE ON MERITS IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: YASHAVANT NARAYANKAR Digitally signed by YASHAVANT NARAYANKAR Date: 2025.11.05 14:27:32 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14975 CP No. 100164 of 2025 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C M JOSHI) Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the respondent. 2. The petitioner is seeking transfer of M.C.No.5183/2020 from the Court of the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru to the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Hubballi on the ground that the petitioner is a resident of Hubballi and it would be inconvenient for her to attend the Court at Bengaluru. 3. The case of the petitioner is that the respondent has filed M.C.No.5183/2020 seeking decree of divorce at the Family Court, Bengaluru. It is contended that the petitioner finds it difficult to attend the Court at Bengaluru and therefore, she could not defend her case properly. Therefore, M.C.No.5183/2020 be transferred to the Family Court at Hubballi. 4. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent reiterating his contentions in the objection statement - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14975 CP No. 100164 of 2025 contends that M.C.No.5183/2020 is in the final stages and both the parties had also filed written arguments so that the Family Court could proceed with the judgment. It is submitted that at that stage, the petitioner sought reopening of the case for cross- examination of PW.1 and also sought to change her advocate. It is contended that when the matter is at the final stages of the inquiry, it would not be proper to transfer the M.C.No.5183/2020 to the Court at Hubballi. 5. On perusal of the records, it appears that initially the petitioner had appeared before the Court at Bengaluru and after engaging with counsel, she tried to defend her case. The PW.1 was cross-examined at some length and thereafter, it appears that the matter was posted for the evidence of the petitioner. The records also reveal that the trial has proceeded to substantial extent. Therefore, it would not be proper to transfer the said matter from the Court at Bengaluru to Hubballi, when the trial is half way. The only ground that is urged by the petitioner before this Court is that she is unable to travel to Bengaluru and attend the Court since she has no income and she is staying with her parents at Hubballi. It is submitted that the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14975 CP No. 100164 of 2025 respondent is working in a real estate company and therefore, he can afford to come to Hubballi. 6. When the trial is half way through it would not be proper to shift the said matter from the Court at Bengaluru to Hubballi. Any such transfer has to happen prior to the commencement of the trial. Therefore, in the interest of the trial and to safeguard the sanctity of judicial proceeding before a Court, it would not be proper to transfer the M.C.No.5183/2020 to the Family Court at Hubballi. However, the grievance of the petitioner that she is unable to bear the travel expenses, need to be considered. 7. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent also submits that he is ready to bear the expenses of the travel of the petitioner to Bengaluru. In that view of the matter, the prayer for transfer of the case to the Court at Hubballi deserves to be rejected while directing respondent No.1 to pay a sum of ₹10,000/- per visit of petitioner to Bengaluru for hearing of M.C.No.5183/2020. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14975 CP No. 100164 of 2025 8. The respondent is directed to transfer the said amount to the account of the petitioner directly. 9. In above terms, the petition is disposed of. SD/- (C M JOSHI) JUDGE SSP CT:PA LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 32