2025:HHC:9993 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CMPMO No.86/2022 Date of Decision: 09th April, 2025 Madhubala .....Petitioner Versus Shashi ….Respondent Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Bipin Chander Negi, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. M.A. Safee, Advocate. For the Respondent: Mr. Raj Kumar Negi, Advocate Bipin Chander Negi, Judge (oral). The present petition has been filed for transferring Case No.12 of 2022, titled Shashi Vs. Madhubala filed under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for the dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce from Principal Judge Family Court, Rampur Bushahr to the Court of Learned District Judge (Family Court), Mandi Circuit at Karsog. 2. Heard counsel for the petitioner and perused the pleadings. No reply has been filed by the respondent despite being given one opportunity in this respect. 3. The Marriage of the present petitioner was solemnized with the respondent in the year 2011. Out of the said wedlock, one female child was born on 25.04.2012, who is currently residing with the petitioner. At the time of filing the present petition i.e March 2022, the petitioner was residing with her 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes 2 2025:HHC:9993 mother as well has her daughter at Village Baral, Tehsil Karsog and District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh since October 2019. She is appointed as a language Teacher in March 2022 and as per the pleadings has been ordered to be posted at Government Senior Secondary School Thulail, District Chamba (HP). 4. The contention of the petitioner is that she is bestowed with the responsibility of looking after her aged mother and 14- year-old daughter, who is studying in Karsog and therefore it is difficult for her to attend the proceedings in the divorce petition instituted by her husband in Family Court at Rampur 5. It is a settled principle of law that in a case where the wife seeks transfer of the petition, then as against husband’s convenience, it is the wife’s convenience that must be looked at. In this respect, a reference can be made to 2016 Latest HLJ (HP) 925, titled as Urvashi Rana Vs Himanshu Nayyar. 6. This Court cannot lose sight of the fact that the petitioner would un-necessarily be made to spend huge sum of money on transportation, as she being respondent in the petition in the Court below initiated at the behest of the respondent (Husband), would always be under an obligation to attend the Court at Rampur. 7. Other than the aforesaid, in Civil Appeal No.4894 of 2022 [arising out of SLP(C) No(s).16465 of 2021], titled as N.C.V. Aishwarya versus A.S. Saravana Karthik Sha, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has outlined the cardinal principles for 3 2025:HHC:9993 considering prayer for transfer of proceedings, from one Court- place to another, in matrimonial matters in the following terms. “7. 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 socioeconomic paradigm in the Indian society, generally, it is the wife’s convenience which must be looked at while considering transfer. 8. 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.” 8. In view of the aforesaid facts and attending circumstances of the case, the fair stand of the petitioner, 4 2025:HHC:9993 whereby she is seeking transfer of the case to Karsog and not to Chamba i.e. her place of posting, which is farther away from Rampur than Karsog and in view of the law enunciated by the Apex Court, present petition is allowed. The divorce petition filed by the respondent (Husband) U/S 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for the dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce, is ordered to be transferred from the Court of Principal Judge Family Court, Rampur Bushahr to the Court of Learned District Judge (Family Court), Mandi Circuit at Karsog. 9. In view of above terms, present petition stands disposed of, so also, pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. 10. Parties are directed to appear before the learned trial Court on 25.04.2025. (Bipin Chander Negi) Judge 09th April, 2025 (Gaurav Rawat)