1 2026:CGHC:24712 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR TPC No. 35 of 2026 Smt. Savita Kumbhkar W/o Tukeshwar Kumbhkar Aged About 33 Years (Now 37 Years) R/o Infront Of Om Nursing Home, Kapil Nagar, Seepat Road Sarkanda Bilaspur, Police Station Sarkanda, Tahsil And District - Bilaspur Chhattisgarh At Present R/o C/o House Of Sister Smt. Satya Kumbhkar, Block-52, Room No. 11, Near Water Tank, Ashoknagar Bilaspur, Police Station - Sarkanda, Tahsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh Mo. No. 7389042824 ... Petitioner versus Tukeshwar @ Bunti Kumbhkar S/o Late Ramprasad Kumbhkar Aged About 35 Years (Now 36 Years) R/o Ramleela Chowk, Kharora, Police Station And Tahsil - Kharora, District Raipur Chhattisgarh Mo. No. 8109629271 ... Respondent {Cause title, as taken from CIS} For Petitioner : Smt. Fouzia Mirza, Senior Advocate assisted by Ms. Rashmi Tandon, Advocate. For Respondent : Mrs. Ranjana Jaiswal, Advocate through Legal Aid Respondent / Husband - Tukeshwar @ Bunti Kumbhkar is also present in person alongwith his neighbour. {Hon’ble Mr. Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Order on Board 18/06/2026 Heard. 1. Petitioner / wife has preferred this transfer petition under Section 24 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (for brevity, “CPC, 1908”) for transfer of Case No. HMA/66/2025 (Tukeshwar @ Bunti Kumbhkar Vs. Smt. Savita Kumbhkar)) pending before First Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Raipur (C.G.) to 2 the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.). 2. Facts of the case, in brief, is that marriage of the petitioner /wife was solemnized with the respondent / husband on 4.5.2018 as per Hindu rites and rituals. After about 11 months of the marriage, relationship between both the parties became sour, therefore, petitioner / wife is residing at Bilaspur alongwith her mother at Bilaspur, thereafter, respondent/husband has filed divorce petition bearing Case No. HMA/66/2025 before the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Raipur, which has sought to be transferred to Family Court, Bilaspur. 3. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner / wife would submit that distance between Bilaspur to Raipur is about 120 kms., the petitioner/wife resides alongwith her old aged mother at Bilaspur. Brother of the petitioner /wife is married and lives separately with his own family. Further there is no other male member in the petitioner's family who could accompany her to the Family Court in Raipur to attend the hearing of case at Raipur. She further submits that one maintenance case bearing MJC (Cr.) No. 747/2025 is already pending against respondent / husband before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Bilaspur (C.G.), therefore, if divorce petition bearing Case No. HMA/66/2025 is transferred from Raipur to Bilaspur, then it would be convenient for both the parties, hence, she prays that transfer petition may be allowed. 4. The respondent has filed his reply. Learned counsel for the respondent while referring to its reply would submit that as per Unique Disability ID (Annexure R-2), the respondent/husband is 100% permanently blind in both eyes. She further submits that if aforesaid divorce case is transferred from Raipur to Bilaspur, then it would be more problematic for respondent/husband, being 100% permanently blind in both the eyes, than the petitioner /wife, therefore, the transfer petitioner may be rejected. 3 5. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. Though there is settled law that for transfer of the case pertaining the matrimonial dispute, convenience of wife ought to have been seen, but in the instant case, respondent / husband is 100 % permanently blind in both the eyes. In this regard, he has also filed Unique Disability ID (Annexure R-1); distance between aforesaid two places is about 120 kms, therefore, it would be more difficult for respondent / husband, than the petitioner / wife to travel such long distance. 7. In that view of the matter, this court is not inclined to transfer said divorce petition filed by the respondent / husband, hence, the transfer petitioner fails and is hereby dismissed. No cost (s). Sd/- (Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge amit AMIT KUMAR DUBEY Digitally signed by AMIT KUMAR DUBEY Date: 2026.06.24 10:59:47 +0530