- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29765 CP No. 110 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA CIVIL PETITION NO. 110 OF 2025 BETWEEN: SMT. SHANTALA M.T., W/O RAVI AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS AT, MARALIGA GRAMA, KOPPA HOBLI, MUDDUR TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT – 571428. PRESENTLY RESIDING AT, NO.28, ANJANADRI NILAYA 2ND CROSS, SLN ENCLAVE, KARIHOBANAHALLI, NAGARSANDRA POST, BENGALURU - 560073 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SHRIRAM ADIGA, ADVOCATE) AND: SRI.RAVI S/O DODDASIDDAYYA, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS R/AT MADAPPANAKOPPALU VILLAGE, ATHAGURU HOBLI, MADDUR TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT – 571428. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. B.RAVINDRA, ADVOCATE) THIS CIVIL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 24 OF THE CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE PRAYING TO ALLOW THE CIVIL PETITION AND TRANSFER THE MC NO.33/2024 PENDING BEFORE THE COURT OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, AT MADDUR Digitally signed by MAHALAKSHMI B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29765 CP No. 110 of 2025 MANDYA DISTRICT TO PRINCIPAL JUDGE FAMILY COURT AT BENGALURU. THIS CIVIL 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 for transfer of M.C.No.33/2024 pending on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Maddur to the Principal Judge Family Court, Bengaluru. 2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the respondent and perused the material on record. 3. It is not in dispute that the petitioner is the legally wedded wife of respondent and their marriage was solemnized on 17.04.2008 as per customs prevailing in their community. Due to un-cordial relationship they are residing separately for quite some time. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29765 CP No. 110 of 2025 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is residing in Bengaluru along with her minor children. The travel distance from Bengaluru to Maddur is 81 kilometers. It is submitted that due to the travel distance and the petitioner having care and custody of the minor children, it is very difficult for the petitioner to travel all the way from Bengaluru to Maddur to attend the proceedings initiated by the respondent in M.C.No.33/2024. 5. Learned counsel for the respondent vehemently objects for the transfer on the ground that the travel distance is only 81 kilometers and the petitioner on her own left matrimonial house and is residing at Bengaluru and thus, there is no difficulty for the petitioner to appear in the proceedings initiated by the respondent-husband at Maddur. 6. In similar circumstances, the Apex Court in the case of N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs. A.S.Saravana Karthik - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29765 CP No. 110 of 2025 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 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. The cardinal principle in matrimonial cases where the wife seeks to invoke Section 24 of CPC, is the 1 Civil Appeal No.4894/2022 - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29765 CP No. 110 of 2025 convenience of the wife than the inconvenience caused to the husband. In the present case, the travel distance from Bengaluru to Maddur is around 81 kilometers. The petitioner is having two minor children, who are studying in Bengaluru. If the petition filed by the respondent- husband in M.C.No.33/2024 seeking restitution of conjugal rights is not transferred to Family Court at Bengaluru, the petitioner would be put to inconvenience. 8. For the foregoing reasons, this Court pass the following: ORDER i. The Civil Petition is allowed. ii. M.C.No.33/2024 pending on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Maddur is withdrawn and transferred to Principal Judge Family Court at Bengaluru. iii. The Principal Judge Family Court, Bengaluru to assign M.C.No.33/2024 to appropriate Court. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29765 CP No. 110 of 2025 iv. The parties shall appear before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru, on 20.08.2025 without waiting for further notice. Sd/- _____________________ JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA AT List No.: 1 Sl No.: 9