1 CGHC010199542026 2026:CGHC:34231 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR TPC No. 94 of 2026 Smt. Monika Manikpuri W/o Manoj Kumar Manikpuri Aged About 21 Years R/o Arjun Nagar Camp 01, Ward No. 29 Bhilai P.S. Vaishali Nagar, Tahsil And District- Durg (C.G.) ... Petitioner/wife versus Manoj Kumar Manikpuri S/o Dipak Manikpuri Aged About 31 Years R/o Ward No. 18, Chhitod, P.S. Purur, District- Balod (C.G.) ... Respondent/husband For Petitioner : Mr. Sandeep Jha, For Respondent : None though served. Hon’ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi, J Order on Board (05th August, 2026) This petition has been preferred under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure for transfer of the Civil Suit No.132-A/2025, instituted upon an application u/s 9 of Hindu Marriage Act being filed by the respondent/husband, pending before the Family Court, Balod to Family 2 Court, Durg. 02. Facts of the case, in brief, are that marriage of the petitioner was solemnized with the respondent on 2.5.2023 and they have been blessed with a girl child. Since harassment was meted out to the petitioner by the respondent/husband, she was compelled to live apart and therefore, she along with her newly born child, presently aged about 2 years, is residing at her parental house at Bhilai, Distt.Durg. The respondent/husband filed an application u/s 9 of Hindu Marriage Act before the learned Family Court, Balod for restitution of conjugal rights whereas the petitioner/wife filed an application u/s 144 of BNSS, 2023 seeking maintenance at Family Court, Durg. Hence this petition. 03. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the behaviour of the respondent was not good with the petitioner and therefore, she started living at Bhilai and filed an application u/s 144 of BNSS, 2023 for maintenance before the Family Court, Durg. The respondent moved an application u/s 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act at Family Court, Balod. Distance from Durg to Balod is around 60 km. Therefore, it would be difficult for the petitioner to travel such a long distance along with her minor daughter of two years. He further submits that the petitioner is having no independent source of income and she is totally dependent upon her parents. He submits that transferring the case from Balod to Durg would enable her to attend the court proceedings effectively without jeopardizing her health or that of 3 her child. It is further submitted that it is well settled law that convenience of the wife must be looked into while considering a transfer petition. Therefore, it is prayed that the transfer petition may be allowed. 04. None for the respondent despite service of notice. 05. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the material available on record. 06. 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." 4 07. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case 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 case 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. 08. In view of the settled legal principles that in transfer of matrimonial cases, the wife's convenience must be looked into, considering the fact situation of the present case where distance between the place of residence of the petitioner i.e. Durg to Balod where civil suit is filed by the respondent/husband, is around 60 km i.e.120 km to and fro, she has the responsibility of her minor daughter of two years, and that the application u/s 144 of BNSS filed by the petitioner/wife is also pending before the Family Court, Durg, this Court is inclined to allow the prayer of the petitioner for transfer of the petition for restitution of conjugal rights filed by the respondent/husband to Family Court, Durg. 09. Accordingly, the instant transfer petition is allowed. It is ordered that case bearing Civil Suit No.132-A2025 pending before the learned Family Court, Balod be transferred to the learned Family Court, Durg for its trial/disposal in accordance with law. 10. The concerned Court is directed to transmit the record of the 5 aforesaid case to the transferee Court within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt or communication of this order. 11. Further, the transferee Family Court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same expeditiously, preferably within a period of 4 months from the date of receipt of the original record. The parties are also directed to cooperate with the Family Court for the early disposal of the case. 12. However, the respondent/husband is at liberty to join the proceedings before the concerned Family Court through Video Conferencing on dates when his personal appearance is not explicitly required by the Court. 13. Pending interim application, if any, stands disposed of. Sd/ (Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge Khan MOHD AKHTAR KHAN Digitally signed by MOHD AKHTAR KHAN Date: 2026.08.06 16:08:25 +0530