1 2025:CGHC:18207 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR TPC No. 26 of 2025 1 - Smt. Preeti Alias Snehil Hiyal W/o Shri Govind Hiyal, D/o Keshu Ram Bahra Aged About 25 Years R/o Ward No. 15, Ravanbhata Ground, Post And Ps Bagbahra, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh .. Applicant versus 1 - Govind Hiyal S/o Shri Binjal Hiyal Aged About 40 Years R/o Durga Nagar, Pandri, Raipur, Tehsil And District Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Respondent For applicant : Mr. Shubhank Tiwari, Adv. For Respondent : Ms. Smita Jha, Adv. (Hon’ble Mr. Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi, J) Order on Board 22/04/2025 1 Applicant/wife has preferred this TPC under Section 24 of the Civil Procedure Code (in short 'CPC') for transfer of Case No. Digitally signed by AVANISH KUMAR PATHAK Date: 2025.04.24 11:27:59 +0530 2 923/2024 (Govind Hiyal Vs. Smt. Priti alias Snehil Hiyal) pending before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Raipur to the Family Court, Mahasamund (CG). 2 Learned counsel for the applicant/wife submits that marriage of applicant/wife and respondent/husband was solemnized on 8-2-2019 and they have been blessed with a male child, presently aged about 3 years. Due to some dispute arose between the parties, on 8-11-2019, the applicant wife went to her parental house. It is submitted that, the applicant is an unemployed lady and dependent upon her parents. The distance between Raipur to Mahasamund is about 55 to 60 km and being mother of a child aged about 3 years, it would be difficult for her to go from Mahasamund to Raipur to attend hearing in aforesaid divorce petition filed by the husband. Therefore, the aforesaid civil suit be transferred from Raipur to Mahasmund. 3 On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent/ husband submits that the distance between Raipur and Mahasamund is only 55 km therefore, there would be no difficulty to the applicant in attending the court proceeding at Raipur, therefore, instant petition may be dismissed. 4 Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available in the transfer petition and the relevant provisions. 5 Though distance between Mahasamund to Raipur is not too much, as it is about 55 to 60 km, but considering the fact that there is a 3 years old child, residing with the applicant, therefore, it would be difficult for 3 the applicant to travel from Mahasamund to Raipur to attend Court proceedings with a 3 years old child. 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 4 considered opinion of this Court, it is a fit case for transfer of the civil suit, as prayed for. 9 Consequently, the instant transfer petition is allowed. It is ordered that the Case No. 923/2024 (Govind Hiyal Vs. Smt. Priti alias Snehil Hiyal) pending before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Raipur (CG) be transferred to the Family Court, Mahasamund (CG) for its trial/disposal in accordance with law. 10 The Principal Judge, Family Court, Raipur (C.G.) is directed to transmit the record of the aforesaid case to the Family Court, Mahasamund 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