1/6 907-MCA-4-2026 (C).DOC IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION MISC.CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4 OF 2026 Ayesha @ Tasnim Asif Mujawar …...Applicant VERSUS Asif Harun Mujawar …...Respondent _________________________________________________________________ Mr. Tehjeet A. Nadaf, for the Applicant. Mr. Ketan Patil, appointed Advocate for Respondent (Through Legal Aid). _________________________________________________________________ CORAM : ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J. DATE : 4th SEPTEMBER, 2026. P.C. 1. When this matter is called out, neither the Respondent nor the Advocate for the Respondent were present, either physically or through V.C. mode. 2. The record indicates that Advocate Mr. Sajid Ahmed Aklujjkar was appointed as a Legal Aid Counsel to represent the Respondent. However, when the matter was called out, the appointed Advocate was absent. The matter was, therefore, kept back. Considering the urgency expressed by Mr. Tehjeet A. Nadaf, learned Advocate for the Applicant, Mr. Ketan Patil, learned Advocate present in Court and was called upon to Shantanu S. Dhudum SHANTANU SHANKARSA DHUDUM Digitally signed by SHANTANU SHANKARSA DHUDUM Date: 2026.09.07 18:30:31 +0530 2/6 907-MCA-4-2026 (C).DOC assist the Court on behalf of the Respondent on the basis of the record available. 3. Advocate Mr. Ketan Patil agreed to appear on behalf of the Respondent. 4. The High Court Legal Services Committee, Mumbai, Circuit Bench at Kolhapur, to take note of appointment of Mr. Ketan Patil, as the Advocate appointed under the Legal Aid Scheme to represent the Respondent in this Application. 5. Mr. Tehjeet A. Nadaf, learned Advocate for the Applicant furnished the copy of the paper-book to Mr. Ketan Patil. Mr. Ketan Patil, learned Advocate for the Respondent requested for a keep back of this matter to study the same. After some time at the request of Mr. Ketan Patil this matter was taken up for hearing. 6. Heard Mr. Tehjeet A. Nadaf, learned Advocate for the Applicant and Mr. Ketan Patil, learned Advocate for Respondent. 7. By the present Application filed under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, the Applicant has sought the following substantial relief: “(a) The order/writ for transfer of Regular Civil Suit No.216 of 2025 from the files of Ld. Civil Court, Vita, Dist. Sangli, to the Family Court, Satara, District Satara.” Shantanu S. Dhudum 3/6 907-MCA-4-2026 (C).DOC 8. Mr. Tehjeet A. Nadaf, learned Advocate for the Applicant, submits that the Applicant (Wife) seeks transfer of Regular Civil Suit No.216 of 2025 filed by the Respondent (Husband) before the Civil Court, Vita, District Sangli, to the Family Court, Satara, District Satara, on the following grounds: (A) The Applicant is a homemaker residing in the District of Satara and the sole caregiver of a minor child aged about six years, born out of the wedlock with the Respondent. (B) The Applicant has no independent source of income and the distance between her place of residence and Satara is approximately 110 kilometres. 9. On the aforesaid grounds, the Applicant submits that it would cause considerable inconvenience to her to attend and pursue the proceedings at Vita and, therefore, seeks transfer of the said proceedings to the Family Court, Satara. 10. Mr. Ketan Patil, learned Advocate for the Respondent, submits that the Respondent is a labourer having ailment. He further submits that the Respondent has also his brother a person with disability to maintain. He therefore oppose this Application. 11. Perused the record. Shantanu S. Dhudum 4/6 907-MCA-4-2026 (C).DOC 12. In N.C.V. Aishwarya vs. A.S. Saravana Karthik Sha1, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in paragraph 9, has observed as follows:- “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 of 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.” 13. The Applicant is a homemaker and has the responsibility of maintaining and taking care of her 6 years old minor son. It is submitted that she has no independent source of income and that she is not receiving any financial support from her husband. Respondent though served in this Application has not filed reply. 1 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1199 Shantanu S. Dhudum 5/6 907-MCA-4-2026 (C).DOC 14. Mr. Tehjeet A. Nadaf, learned Advocate for the Applicant submits that Respondent is not paying any maintenance to Applicant or to the minor son. 15. Mr. Tehjeet A. Nadaf, learned Advocate for the Applicant, and Mr. Ketan Patil, learned Advocate for the Respondent, state that although the proceedings are titled as Regular Civil Suit No.216 of 2025, the dispute involved therein is, in substance, a matrimonial dispute. 16. Considering the difficulty expressed by the Applicant of the Applicant being required to travel approximately 110 k.m. to pursue and attend the proceedings at Sangli, I am of the view that the inconvenience that would be caused to the Applicant would be much greater than the inconvenience, if any, that may be caused to the Respondent. I, therefore, deem it fit and proper to allow the present Application in terms of prayer clause (a). Consequently, Regular Civil Suit No.216 of 2025, filed by the Respondent and pending before the Civil Court, Vita, District Sangli, stands withdrawn and transferred to the Civil Court, Satara, District Satara. 17. The Principal District Judge, Satara, is requested to assign Regular Civil Suit No.216 of 2025 to the Court at Satara, having jurisdiction to deal with the matrimonial and family dispute. 18. The Applicant shall produce a copy of this order before the Principal District Judge, Satara. Shantanu S. Dhudum 6/6 907-MCA-4-2026 (C).DOC 19. The High Court Legal Services Committee, Mumbai, Circuit Bench at Kolhapur, shall take a note of the appearance of Mr. Kunal Patil, learned Advocate in this Application, shall quantify and pay the legal fees payable to him under the Legal Aid Scheme for representing the Respondent in this Application. 20. Miscellaneous Civil Application No.4 of 2026 is disposed of. ( ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.) Shantanu S. Dhudum