1 2025:CGHC:14826 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR TPC No. 32 of 2025 1 - Smt. Urvashi Vishwakarma D/o Shri Bhanuram Vishwakarma Aged About 23 Years R/o Village- Ranwa, District- Dhamtari, (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - Shekhar Vishwakarma S/o Shri Chandrika Vishwakarma Aged About 30 Years R/o Durga Vihar Colony, Dunda, Apna Parisar, Police Station- Tikrapara, Raipur, Tehsil And District- Raipur, (C.G.) ... Respondent For Petitioner : Mr. Anmol Sharma, Advocate. For Respondent : Ms. Nilu Singh, Adv. on behalf of Mr. Vikash Dubey, Advocate. (Hon’ble Mr. Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Order on Board 27/03/2025 Heard. 1. Petitioner wife has preferred this transfer petition under Section 24 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (henceforth 'CPC') for transfer of Case No. HMA/1105/24 (Shekhar Vishwakarma Vs. Urvashi Vishwakarma) pending before Family Court, Raipur (C.G.) to the Family Court, Dhamtari (C.G.). 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/wife submits that marriage of petitioner/wife was solemnized with the respondent/husband on 22.04.2023 as 2 per Hindu Rites and Rituals. After some time of the marriage, respondent/husband and his family members used to harass the petitioner/wife physically & mentally in connection with demand of dowry and they compelled her to leave her matrimonial house, therefore, petitioner/wife is residing alongwith her parents at Dhamtari. It is submitted that the petitioner has filed divorce petition bearing case No. HMA/1105/2024 under Section 13 (1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 before the Family Court, Raipur. He further submits that the petitioner/wife has also filed an application seeking maintenance under Section 144 of the B.N.S.S. against the respondent/husband bearing MJC Case No. 2/2025 and criminal case under Domestic Violence Act bearing case No. 596/2025 before the Court at Dhamtari (C.G.), therefore, if the divorce petition filed by respondent/husband bearing HMA/1105/2024 is transferred to Family Court, Dhamtari, then it would be convenient for the respondent/husband, as he can attend the hearing of aforesaid three cases at Dhamtari Court itself, therefore, it is prayed that Case No. HMA/1105/24 (Shekhar Vishwakarma Vs. Urvashi Vishwakarma) pending before Family Court, Raipur (C.G.) may be transferred to the Family Court, Dhamtari (C.G.). 3. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent / husband submits that distance between Dhamtari to Raipur is only 80 kms and there is direct bus connectivity between these two places, therefore, it would not be difficult for the petitioner/wife to travel from Dhamtari to Raipur to attend the hearing of aforesaid two cases, therefore, transfer petition is liable to be dismissed. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 5. The ground taken for the transfer of divorce case is that two cases filed by the petitioner wife in respect of both the parties are pending before the 3 Court at Dhamtari, therefore, it would be convenient for both the parties, if divorce case bearing Case No. HMA/1105/2024 filed by respondent / husband before the Family Court, Raipur, be transferred to Family Court, Dhamtari, rather it would not cause any difficulty for the husband, as he has to go in the hearing of two other cases filed by the petitioner/wife in the Court at Dhamtari. 6. In the matter of N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs. A.S. Saravana Karthik (2022 SCC Online SC 1199), their Lordships of the Supreme Court has held 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 -v- Kumar Sanjay and another [(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 -v- Kishore Babulal Pardeshi [(2005) 12 SCC 237] has observed that the convenience of wife is to be preferred over the convenience of the husband. 8. Considering the fact situation of the case, which has been observed in preceding paragraphs of his order and in light of the principles of law laid down 4 by the Apex Court in aforecited cases; 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. HMA/1105/24 (Shekhar Vishwakarma Vs. Urvashi Vishwakarma) pending before Family Court, Raipur (C.G.) be transferred to the Family Court, Dhamtari (C.G.) for its trial/ disposal in accordance with law. The Family Court, Raipur, District Raipur is directed to transmit the record of the above case to the Family Court, Dhamtari within a period of 15 days. 10. It is further directed that that Family Court, Dhamtari, District Dhamtari shall expedite the trial and conclude the same expeditiously preferably within period of four months from the date of receipt of the record from transferring Court. 11. In view of above order, pending interim application, if any, stands disposed of. No order as to costs. Sd/- (Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge Amit/- AMIT KUMAR DUBEY Digitally signed by AMIT KUMAR DUBEY Date: 2025.04.01 13:12:26 +0530