1 2026:CGHC:253 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR TPC No. 180 of 2025 Smt. Preeti Dewangan W/o Rajkumar Dewangan Aged About 25 Years R/o Collector Colony, Near Shiv Mandir, Ganganagar, Kawardha, District - Kabirdham (C.G.) ... Petitioner. Versus Rajkumar Dewangan S/o Ramji Dewangan Aged About 31 Years R/o Ward No. 04, Mahamaya Para, Nawagarh District - Bemetara (C.G.) ... Respondent. For Petitioner : Mr. Kanhaiya Ram Yadav, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr. Shobhit Koshta, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Justice Deepak Kumar Tiwari Order On Board 05/01/2026 1. This Petition has been filed under Section 24 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 by the petitioner/wife seeking transfer of Civil Suit No.A/126/2025 (Rajkumar Vs. Smt. Preeti) from the Family Court Bemetara to Family Court Kawardha, District Kabirdham (CG). 2. The marriage between the parties was solemnized on 26.05.2024. After some time, the dispute arose between the parties, due to which, the petitioner compelled to reside at her parental house at Kawrdha. Subsequently, the petitioner has filed application for grant of maintenance before the Family Court Kawardha. Subsequently, the respondent/husband has filed an Digitally signed by AJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI DN: cn=AJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, ou=HIGH COURT, o=HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, st=Chhattisgarh, c=IN Date: 2026.01.06 10:41:47 +0530 2 application under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act before the Family Court, Bemetara for restitution of conjugal rights and the petitioner is seeking transfer of said case to Family Court, Bemetara. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it is very painful and difficult to travel to Family Court, Bemetara to attend each and every hearing of the case as distance between the two courts is too far and it is not easy to go on every hearing at concerned Family Court. Therefore, the case of the respondent may be transferred to Family Court, Kawardha for the convenience of the wife to participate in the proceedings. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent would oppose the prayer for transfer of the case. 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and also perused the documents annexed with the petition. 6. In the matter of N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs. A.S. Saravana Karthik (2022 SCC Online SC 1199) the Hon’ble Supreme Court has observed that generally it is wife’s convenience which must be looked at while considering transfer. It is held that 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. It is also held that when two or 3 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. 7. Having regard the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and in view of the aforesaid settled principle, this Court is inclined to allow the prayer made by the petitioner. 8. Consequently, the Transfer Petition is allowed and it is ordered that Case bearing Civil Suit No.A/126/2025 pending before the Family Court Bemetara to Family Court Kawardha, District Kabirdham (CG) for its trial/disposal in accordance with law. 9. Both the parties shall remain present before the Family Court, Kawardha on 11.03.2026. 10. The respondent/husband would be at liberty to participate in the proceedings through video conferencing/virtually unless otherwise directed by the concerned Court. 11. Pending application, if any, also stand disposed of. Sd/- /-Sd/- (Deepak Kumar Tiwari) Judge Ajay