- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28991 CP No. 40 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA CIVIL PETITION NO. 40 OF 2025 BETWEEN: SMT MANGALA GOWRI W/P VINAY KUMAR K.M. D/O RENUKAIAH KUDLAGI MATT AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS R/AT 2ND MAIN 6TH CROSS VIJAYA NAGARA BADAVANE DEVRAJ URS LAYOUT DAVANAGERE. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RUDRAPPA P.,ADVOCATE) AND: SRI. VINAY. K. M. S/O MANJUNATHA SWAMY K.M, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, R/AT BASAVESHWARA NILAYA, 6TH CROSS NEAR A CROSS NEAR SBI ATM DEVARAYAPATTANA, NEW EXTENSION, TUMAKUR- 572101 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. SURESH D. DESHPANDE, ADVOCATE) THIS CP IS FILED U/S. 24 OF CPC 1908, PRAYING TO TRANSFER THE M.C.NO.305/2024 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE HONBLE JUDGE, PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, Digitally signed by MAHALAKSHMI B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28991 CP No. 40 of 2025 TUMAKUR, TO THE HONBLE PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, DAVANAGERE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA ORAL ORDER The present petition is filed by the petitioner-wife seeking to transfer M.C.No.305/2024 filed by the respondent-husband seeking dissolution of marriage pending on the file of the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Tumakuru, to the Family Court, Davanagere. 2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent, and perused the material on record. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner-wife is residing at Davanagere and distance between Davanagere and Tumakuru is approximately 206 kms. It is contended that such a long travel distance causes considerable hardship and inconvenience to the - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28991 CP No. 40 of 2025 petitioner-wife. It is further submitted that petitioner-wife has instituted Crl.Misc.13/2025 under Section 125 Cr.P.C. seeking maintenance, before Family Court at Davanagere. 4. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent submits that petitioner–wife has instituted Crl.Misc.No.13/2025, before Family Court, Davanagere. It is submitted that institution of proceedings at Davanagere cannot be a valid ground to seek transfer of the husband's petition. It is further submitted that respondent – husband is suffering from certain health issues and if matter is transferred to Davanagere, it would cause great inconvenience to him. 5. As per the material placed on record, it is not in dispute that Crl.Misc.No. 13/2025 has been filed by the petitioner-wife after the institution of M.C.No.305/2024 at Tumakuru. However, this fact by itself does not disentitle the petitioner from seeking transfer particularly when the travel distance is more than 250 kms to attend - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28991 CP No. 40 of 2025 proceedings at Tumakuru. This would be one of the circumstances for the petitioner-wife to file Crl.Misc.13/2025, as she was not granted any maintenance by the respondent-husband. 6. The cardinal principle as laid down by 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 rather than the inconvenience caused to the husband. 7. In similar circumstances, the Apex Court in the case of N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs. A.S.Saravana Karthik Sha1 (Aishwarya) has held at para No.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 1 Civil Appeal No.4894/2022 - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28991 CP No. 40 of 2025 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.” 8. In the instant case, the petitioner-wife is aged about 37 years. The Travel distance from Davangere to Tumakuru is more than 200 Kilometers causing inconvenience to the petitioner. The learned counsel for the respondent would contend that the respondent has health issues. However, no materials are forthcoming to substantiate the alleged health issues as claimed by the respondent. In the said circumstances, the petitioner-wife has made out a ground to transfer the M.C.No.305/2024 to the Family Court at Davanagere. 9. Accordingly, I pass the following: ORDER ii) The Civil Petition is allowed. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28991 CP No. 40 of 2025 ii) M.C.No.305/2024, pending on the file Principal Judge, Family Court, Tumakuru, is withdrawn and transferred to the Principal Judge, Family Court at Davanagere. iii) Parties to appear before the Family Court, Davanagere, on 24.09.2025 without waiting for further notice. Sd/- ________________________ JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA HR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 3