- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1067 CP No. 100116 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR CIVIL PETITION NO.100116 OF 2025 BETWEEN: YOGESH S/O. CHANNEGOUDAR G. C., AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. LAXMIPUR AREA, 3RD CROSS, ARASIKERE TQ. ARASIKERE, DIST. HASSAN. …PETITIONER (BY SRI LINGESH V. KATTEMANE, ADVOCATE) AND: SMT. SHEETAL W/O. YOGESH G. C., AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEWIFE, R/O. LAXMIPUR AREA, 3RD CROSS, ARASIKERE, TQ. ARASIKERE, DIST. HASSAN, NOW RESIDING AT AMEENPUR STREET, GADAG ROAD, KOPPAL TQ. & DIST. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI HANUMANTHAREDDY SAHUKAR, ADVOCATE.) THIS CIVIL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 24 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, PRAYING TO WITHDRAW M.C. NO.72/2024 ON THE FILE OF PRL. JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, AT: KOPPAL TO TRANSFER TO THE PRL. JUDGE, FAMILY COURT AT: DAVANGERI AND TO DISPOSE IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW BY ALLOWING THIS CIVIL PETITION IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by MALLIKARJUN RUDRAYYA KALMATH Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1067 CP No. 100116 of 2025 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR) Though the case is listed for admission, with the consent of both the learned counsels, it is taken up for final disposal. 2. This petition is filed under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 19081, praying to transfer the case in M.C.No.72/2024, pending on the file of Principal Judge, Family Court, Koppal, to the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Davanagere. 3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent. Perused the material available on record. 4. The parties to the proceedings do not dispute that the marriage between the petitioner and the respondent was solemnized as per their customs and rituals prevailing in their community at Pramod Kalyan Mantap of 1 For short, ‘CPC’ - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1067 CP No. 100116 of 2025 Sathyanaranpur Canal road, Koppal, on 29.11.2007. She has the care and custody of two children born in the wedlock and, according to the respondent/wife, both the children are residing with her. 5. It is alleged that the marital relationship between the parties became strained and, consequently, the wife deserted the husband and started residing separately. Hence, the respondent/wife was constrained to file a petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act of 19552, in M.C.No.72/2024, which is pending before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Koppal. 6. The petitioner/husband has filed the present petition under Section 24 of the CPC seeking transfer of the said case to the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court at Davanagere, contending that Davanagere is a common place convenient for both parties to attend the Court. Therefore, prays to transfer the case. 2 For short, ‘Act of 1955’ - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1067 CP No. 100116 of 2025 7. The respondent/wife has opposed the transfer petition contending that three cases are pending against the petitioner/husband before the Courts at Koppal and that the petitioner is attending all those proceedings. Therefore, there is no impediment for the petitioner to attend the present case at Koppal. 8. The petitioner/husband is an agriculturist by profession, whereas the respondent/wife is a woman having no independent source of income and is residing with two minor children. Access to Court is also one of relevant consideration for access to justice. The respondent/wife, being a woman with two minor children, would face difficulty in attending the Court at places other than Koppal, where she is presently residing. On the other hand, the petitioner/husband is capable of attending the Court at Koppal. Therefore, there is no need to transfer the case from Principal Judge, Family Court, Koppal to the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Davanagere or any other place. Therefore, the petition is liable to be dismissed. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1067 CP No. 100116 of 2025 9. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. 10. If the petitioner apprehends any threat from the respondent or her relatives, then the petitioner is at liberty to file an appropriate application before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Koppal. 11. The Family Court is directed to pass appropriate orders as per law and to provide security to the petitioner/husband during his attendance before the Court. 12. No order as to cost. Sd/- (HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR) JUDGE PMP /CT-AN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 35