- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38459 CP No. 287 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA CIVIL PETITION NO. 287 OF 2025 BETWEEN: SMT. ASHA KUMARI T W/O PRAKASH Y.D AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS NO.25, P.NO.59/2/43 7TH CROSS, 1ST MAIN JAKKASANDRA, KORMANGALA 1ST BLOCK, BENGALURU - 560 100. …PETITIONER (BY SMT. NIRMALA K, ADV.) AND: SRI PRAKASH Y.D S/O LATE SRI DODDA MARIGOWDA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS YATHAGADHAHALLI VILLAGE GUTHULU COLOY POST KOTHATHI HOBALI MANDYA TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT - 577 428. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI JAGADISH, ADV., FOR SRI K.L. SREENIVAS, ADV.) THIS CIVIL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SEC. 24 OF THE CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE. 1908., PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS AND TRANSFER THE PETITION BEARING MC NO.5/2024 DATED 4.01.2024 FILED UNDER SEC.13(1) (i-a) (i-b) OF HINDU MARRIAGE ACT FOR DISSOLUTION OF MARRIAGE PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, MANDYA COURT TO THE LEARNED ADDITIONAL PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT AT Digitally signed by MAHALAKSHMI B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38459 CP No. 287 of 2025 BANGALORE FOR ADJUDICATION AND GRANT SUCH OTHER RELIEF IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA ORAL ORDER 1. The present petition is filed by petitioner-wife seeking to withdraw M.C.No.5/2024, instituted by the respondent-husband seeking dissolution of marriage by invoking Section 13(1)(ia) & (ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 ('Act', for short), pending on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge & CJM, Mandya, and transfer the same to the Court of Addl. Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru. 2. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for the respondent. 3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is presently residing at Bengaluru along with her daughter, who is now aged about 18 years. The travel distance from Bengaluru to Mandya is around 116 Kms., - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38459 CP No. 287 of 2025 one way, taking approximately 2 hours 20 minutes to travel the said distance. Compelling the petitioner to travel such a long distance, particularly, when she is having a grown up daughter, causes great inconvenience and hardship to the petitioner. 4. Per contra, learned Counsel for the respondent submits that the petitioner has filed a suit representing her daughter seeking partition and separate possession which is pending before the Court at Mandya. Therefore, it cannot be said that her appearance in matrimonial case at Mandya would cause any inconvenience. 5. This Court has given anxious consideration to the rival contentions and perused the material on record. 6. It is the cardinal principle underlining matrimonial cases where the wife seeks for transfer of proceedings by invoking Section 24 of CPC, the paramount consideration of the Court is the convenience of the wife, rather than the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38459 CP No. 287 of 2025 inconvenience that may be caused to the respondent- husband. 7. It is not in dispute that petitioner is now residing in Bengaluru with her daughter. The travel distance of 116 Kms., one way, requiring about 2 hours 20 minutes, would certainly cause inconvenience. Although the learned Counsel for the respondent contends that petitioner is attending proceedings at Mandya in connection with a partition suit, her presence in the matrimonial case would be required more frequently. Thus, the inconvenience outweighs the respondent's contention and the CP warrants acceptance. 8. It is also not in dispute that criminal miscellaneous petition filed by the petitioner invoking Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, seeking maintenance, is pending consideration before the Court at Bengaluru. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38459 CP No. 287 of 2025 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, this Court proceeds to pass the following: ORDER ii) The Civil Petition is allowed. ii) M.C.No.5/2024 pending on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge & CJM, Mandya, is withdrawn and transferred to the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court at Bengaluru. 1Civil Appeal No.4894/2022 - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38459 CP No. 287 of 2025 iii) Parties are directed to appear before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru, on 30.10.2025 without waiting for further notice. iv) The Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru, shall assign the matter to appropriate court. Sd/- _____________________ JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA KK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 9