- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35976 CP No. 118 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA CIVIL PETITION NO.118 OF 2025 BETWEEN: SMT. PAVITHRA .K AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, W/O MANJUNATH M.N, D/O KEMPANNA, R/AT SONNAPANAHATTI, KASABA HOBLI, NEAR MARAMMA TEMPLE, MALUR TALUK, KOLAR DISTRCIT-563130 PRESENTLY R/AT: #12, 3RD FLOOR, 4TH CROSS, 11TH MAIN, KAMKSHIPALYA, VRUSHABHAVATHINAGAR, BENGALURU-560079. …PETITIONER (BY SRI SHRIDHARAMURTHY H.R., ADVOCATE) AND: MR. MANJUNATH M.N. AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, S/O NARAYANASWAMY C., R/AT 41, MAHANTHALINGAPURA, BANNERUGHATTA, POST, ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU-560083. …RESPONDENT (BY SMT GUNASHEELA B., ADVOCATE & SRI T. SRINIVASA, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by MAHALAKSHMI B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35976 CP No. 118 of 2025 THIS CIVIL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 24 OF CPC PRAYING TO WITHDRAW THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN M.C.NO.190/2024 PENDING ON THE FILE OF PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT ANEKAL, BENGALURU RURAL AND TO TRANSFER THE SAME TO V ADDITIONAL PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT AT BENGALURU. 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 wife seeking to withdraw and transfer M.C.No.190/2024 initiated by the respondent-husband seeking divorce pending on the file of the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC at Anekal to V Additional, Principal Judge, Family Court at Bengaluru. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent and perused the material on record. 3. The marriage between the petitioner and respondent was solemnized on 13.11.2022, as per the customs prevailing in their community. Due to un-cordial - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35976 CP No. 118 of 2025 relationship they are residing separately for quite some time. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is working in Wipro, Electronic City, Bengaluru and she has already instituted proceedings under Section 144 of BNS before the V Additional, Principal Judge, Family Court at Bengaluru. It is contended that the petitioner is not in position to pursue proceedings in two different Courts situated at two different places and compelling her to attend the case at Anekal would cause hardship and inconvenience. It is submitted that despite being aware of the petitioner’s employment, the respondent has chosen to file M.C.No.190/2024 at Anekal. 5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent submits that the petitioner is employed at Wipro, Electronic City, Bengaluru, which falls within Anekal Taluk, and therefore, no inconvenience or hardship caused to the petitioner in attending the proceedings at Anekal. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35976 CP No. 118 of 2025 6. Upon consideration of the rival submission, the principal ground urged by the petitioner is that she is employed at Bengaluru, and therefore, she would face inconvenience in proceeding the case at Anekal. However, it is admitted fact that the petitioner is employed at Wipro, Electronic City, which falls within Anekal Taluk. Hence, the contention of inconvenience is wholly misconceived. The distance between her place of employment and the Court at Anekal, is neither substantial nor such as to cause any undue hardship. 7. In the present case, the petitioner has not demonstrated any exceptional hardship or circumstances warranting transfer. Accordingly, the transfer petition fails and is dismissed. Sd/- ____________________ JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA AT List No.: 1 Sl No.: 7