1 2026:CGHC:26133 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR TPC No. 77 of 2026 Smt. Poonam Yadav W/o- Sarvoday Kumar Yadav, Aged About 40 Years R/o- Ward No. 18, Shiv Mandir Road, Nearby Airtel Tower, Padumnagar, Police Station- Bhilai- Charoda, Bhilai-03, District- Durg,chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner versus Sarvoday Kumar Yadav S/o- Late Shri Malram Yadav, Aged About 46 Years R/o- I B/88, Ward No. 20, S.B.S S.E.C.L Colony, Korba, Tehsil- Korba, District- Korba, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent {Cause title, as taken from CIS} For Petitioner : Mr. Gourang Dubey, Advocate. For Respondent : None present, though served. {Hon’ble Mr. Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Order on Board 25/06/2026 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 Civil Suit No. 46-A/2026 (Sarvoday Kumar Yadav Vs. Smt. Poonam Yadav) pending before Family Court, Korba, District Korba (C.G.) to the Family Court, Durg, District Durg (C.G.). 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/wife submits that marriage of petitioner/wife was solemnized with the respondent/husband on 10.05.2022 as per Hindu rites and customs. After few months of the marriage, due to 2 harassment meted out to the petitioner / wife by respondent / husband, she has been compelled to live apart from respondent/husband, therefore, she is residing alongwith her old aged mother at Bhilai, District Durg. It is further submitted that petitioner/wife filed an application under Section 144 of the BNSS seeking maintenance before the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Durg bearing MJC No. 258 / 26 and she has also filed an application under Section 12 read with Section 18,19,20,21 & 22 of Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005 before Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bhilai -3, District Durg bearing MJC No. 57 / 2026 against the respondent/husband. He submits that the respondent/husband has filed an application under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for restitution of conjugal right bearing civil suit No.46-A/ 2026 before Family Court, Korba, District Korba (C.G.) only to harass the petitioner/wife. It is further submitted since two cases filed by the petitioner/wife against the respondent / husband are pending before the Family Court, Durg and in the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bhilai-3, District Durg (C.G.), respectively, therefore, it would not be inconvenient for the respondent / husband to attend the court proceeding at Durg, District Durg, if the civil suit filed by him under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage is transferred from Family Court, Korba to the Court of Principal Juge, Family Court, Durg and the distance between these two places is 236 kms, therefore, it would not be inconvenient for the respondent / husband to attend the court proceeding at Korba, District Korba, if the civil suit filed by him under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 is transferred from Family Court, Korba to the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Durg. 3. Despite service of notice, neither respondent present nor represented by any counsel. 3 4. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the material available on record. 5. The distance between aforesaid two places is said to be 236 kms. and one maintenance case bearing MJC No. 258 /26 and one domestic violence case bearing MJC No. 57 of 2026 filed by the petitioner /wife are already pending against the respondent / husband before the Court at Durg, therefore, if Civil Suit No. 46-A/2026 (Sarvoday Kumar Yadav Vs. Smt. Poonam Yadav) pending before Family Court, Korba, District Korba (C.G.) is transferred to the Family Court, Durg, District Durg (C.G.).) then it would not cause any difficulty to the respondent/husband, as otherwise also he has come to attend hearing of the maintenance case & domestic violence case filed by the petitioner/wife at Durg. 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 4 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 this order and in light of the principles of law laid down 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 Civil Suit No. 46-A/2026 (Sarvoday Kumar Yadav Vs. Smt. Poonam Yadav) pending before Family Court, Korba, District Korba (C.G.) be transferred to the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Durg, District Durg (C.G.) for its trial/ disposal in accordance with law. The Judge, Family Court, Korba, District Korba (C.G.) is directed to transmit the record of the above case to the court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Durg, District Durg (C.G.) within a period of 15 days. 10. It is further directed that the Principal Judge, Family Court, Durg, District Durg 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. It is made clear that both the parties shall cooperate with the Family Court for expeditious disposal of the case. 12. Pending interlocutory application (s), if any, also stands disposed of. Sd/- (Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge Amit AMIT KUMAR DUBEY Digitally signed by AMIT KUMAR DUBEY Date: 2026.06.29 16:35:35 +0530 5