1 CGHC010235882026 2026:CGHC:37347 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR TPC No. 102 of 2026 Smt. Dhaneshwari Patel W/o Jugesh Patel Aged About 27 Years R/o Vijay Nagar, Bhanpuri, Police Station Khamtarai, Tehsil And Distt. Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus Jugesh Patel S/o Mangatram Patel Aged About 23 Years R/o Village Reki, Bhadrapara, Tehsil - Hardibazar, Distt Korba Chhattisgarh ... Respondent For Petitioner : Mr. Aakash Ahuja, Advocate For Respondent : Mr. TR Patel, Advocate (Hon’ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Order on Board 20.08.2026 1. The petitioner/wife has preferred this transfer petition under Section 24 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (henceforth 'CPC') for transfer of Civil Suit No.128-A/2025 (Jugesh Patel vs. Dhaneshwari Patel) pending before Family Court, Katghora Distt. Korba to Family Court Raipur (CG). 2. The facts of the case, in brief, are that the marriage between the petitioner/wife and the respondent/husband was solemnized on 23.01.2022 in accordance with Hindu rites and customs. Out of their wedlock, a male child was born on 16.01.2023. After the marriage, under the guise of prevailing traditional practices, the petitioner was subjected to physical torture and cruelty on account of BINI PRADEEP Digitally signed by BINI PRADEEP Date: 2026.08.21 15:48:30 +0530 2 demands for dowry. Thereafter, the petitioner filed an application under Section 125 of the CrPC seeking maintenance. The respondent also filed application under Section 13(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, seeking a decree of divorce. The petitioner has, therefore, sought transfer of the said divorce proceedings to the Family Court at Raipur. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that to and fro distance between Raipur and Katghora is approximately 250 Km, and it would be difficult for the petitioner, who has a three-year-old minor child, to travel such a distance to attend the Court proceedings at Katghora. It is further submitted that the petitioner has already filed an application under Section 125 of the CrPC seeking maintenance against the respondent/husband, which is pending consideration before the Family Court, Raipur, wherein the respondent has entered appearance. Hence, if the civil suit filed by the respondent is transferred from Family Court, Katghora to Family Court Raipur, it would be convenient for the respondent/ husband, as he can appear in both the cases in the Court of Raipur. Hence, it is prayed that present transfer petition may be allowed and the petition bearing Civil Suit No.128-A/2025 (Jugesh Patel vs. Dhaneshwari Patel) pending before Family Court, Katghora be transferred to Family Court Raipur (CG). 4. Learned counsel for the respondent has made formal objection on the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the material placed on record. 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 3 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 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. 8. As per the petitioner, distance between Katghora and Raipur is about 250 Km and it is very difficult for her to travel such distance with her minor son. Further, one case under Section 125 CrPC, for maintenance is pending against the respondent/ husband before Family Court Raipur and he has to attend that proceeding, hence, it would be convenient for the respondent/husband also if the Civil Suit No.128-A/2025 (Jugesh Patel vs. Dhaneshwari Patel) pending before Family Court, Katghora is transferred to Family Court Raipur (CG). 9. Considering the fact situation of the case and also considering the aforecited case laws, wherein it has been observed that, in transfer of matrimonial cases, the wife’s convenience must be looked into, in the considered opinion of this Court, it is a fit case for transfer of the civil suit, as prayed for. 10. Accordingly, the instant transfer petition is allowed. It is ordered that Civil Suit No.128-A/2025 (Jugesh Patel vs. Dhaneshwari Patel) pending before Family Court, Katghora be transferred to Family Court Raipur (CG) for its trial/ disposal in accordance with law. The Judge, Family Court, Katghora, Distt. Korba is directed to transmit the record of the above case to the Family Court, Raipur, Distt. Raipur, within a period of 15 days. 4 11. Further, the Judge, Family Court, Raipur is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same expeditiously, preferably within a period of four months from the date of receipt of the record from transferring Court. The parties are also directed to cooperate with the concerned Family Court for early disposal of the case. If the personal appearance of the respondent is not required, he may be permitted to appear through Video Conferencing. 12. In view of above order, pending interim application(s), if any, stands disposed of. No order as to costs. Sd/- (Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge Bini