1 CGHC010293212026 2026:CGHC:38456 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR TPC No. 128 of 2026 Rani Bai Rajak W/o Khilendra Kumar Aged About 27 Years R/o Village- Gaitara, P.S. And Tahsil- Balodabazar, District- Balodabazar-Bhatapara, C.G. Presently Residing At- House Of Father Shri Manharan Rajak, Village Kodwabani, P.S. Lalpur, Tehsil And District Mungeli, C.G. ... Petitioner. Versus Khilendra Kumar Rajak S/o Numesh Rajak Aged About 29 Years R/o Village- Gaitara, P.S. And Tahsil- Balodabazar, District- Balodabazar-Bhatapara, C.G. ... Respondent. (cause title downloaded from CIS Periphery) Petitioner : Mr. Atul Kumar Kesharwani, Advocate. For Respondent : None despite service of notice. (Hon’ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi ) Order on Board 31/08/2026 1. As per the office report, notice has been served upon the respondent. However, neither the respondent nor any counsel has appeared on his behalf. 2. The petitioner/wife has preferred this transfer petition under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (henceforth 'CPC') seeking the transfer of the divorce petition filed by the respondent/husband, bearing Civil Suit No. A/74/2026 (Khilendra Kumar Rajak vs. Rani Bai Rajak), from the Family Digitally signed by AJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI DN: cn=AJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, ou=HIGH COURT, o=HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, st=Chhattisgarh, c=IN Date: 2026.09.01 10:25:17 +0530 2 Court, Balodabazar, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara to the Family Court, Mungeli, District Mungeli (C.G.). 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the marriage between the parties was solemnized in the month of May, 2019, and out of the said wedlock, they were blessed with two children, namely, Shivam Rajak and Vikas Rajak. He further submits that Vikas Rajak, aged about 3 years, is residing with the petitioner, whereas Shivam Rajak, now aged about 6 years, is residing with the respondent. He further submits that after some time of marriage, relations between the parties became sore, compelling the petitioner to leave the matrimonial home and reside at Mungeli with her parents. He further submits that the petitioner has no independent source of income and is unable to travel to the Family Court, Balodabazar for every hearing due to the round-trip distance of approximately 160 kilometers. He also contends that it is a well-settled principle of law that the convenience of the wife must be kept paramount while considering a transfer petition. Therefore, it is prayed that the transfer petition be allowed. 4. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the material placed on record. 5. 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. 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: 3 "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. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the well- settled legal position prioritizing the convenience of the wife in matrimonial disputes, and the fact that the petitioner is residing with a minor child aged about 3 years, this Court is of the opinion that it is just and proper to transfer the proceedings to the Family Court, Mungeli. This will mitigate hardship for the petitioner/wife and facilitate regular proceedings. 8. Consequently, the transfer petition is allowed. It is ordered that Civil Suit No. A/74/2026 (Khilendra Kumar Rajak vs. Rani Bai Rajak) be transferred from the Family Court, Balodabazar, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara to the Family Court, Mungeli, District Mungeli (C.G.), for trial and disposal in accordance with law. 9. The transferor Court is directed to transmit the record of the case to the transferee Court within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt or communication of this order. 4 10. Further, the transferee Family Court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the proceedings expeditiously, preferably within a period of 4 months from the date of receipt of the record. The parties are directed to cooperate with the Family Court for an early and efficacious disposal of the case. 11. However, the respondent/husband shall be at liberty to join the proceedings before the Family Court through video conferencing on dates when his personal appearance is not explicitly required by the court. 12. Pending interim applications, if any, stand disposed of. Sd/- (Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge Ajay