1 2026:CGHC:1096 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR TPC No. 157 of 2025 Smt. Ankita Sharma W/o Neeraj Bhatt @ Neeru Aged About 34 Years R/o Kargil Chowk Megha Road Kurud, Tehsil And P.S. Kurud, District Dhamtari (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) Versus Neeraj Bhatt @ Neeru S/o Shri Suresh Bhatt Aged About 35 Years R/o Turkaripara, Ward No. 8, Khairagarh, Tehsil Khairagarh, District Khairagarh- Chuikhadan-Gandai (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant : Ms. Sweksha Sharma, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr. Rohan Kumbhare, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Justice Deepak Kumar Tiwari Order On Board 08/01/2026 1. This Petition has been filed under Section 24 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 by the petitioner/wife seeking transfer of Case No.32A/2025 (Neeraj Bhatt Vs. Ankita Sharma) from the Family Court, Link Court of Rajandgaon at Khairagarh to Family Court Dhamtari (CG). 2. The marriage between the parties was solemnized on 08.06.2017. After some time, the dispute arose between the parties, due to which, the petitioner started residing at her parental house at Dhamtari. At Dhamtari the petitioner filed application for grant of maintenance before the Family Court Dhamtari. Subsequently, the respondent/husband has filed an application under Section Digitally signed by AJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI DN: cn=AJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, ou=HIGH COURT, o=HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, st=Chhattisgarh, c=IN Date: 2026.01.08 16:36:28 +0530 2 13 (1) (A) of the Hindu Marriage Act before the Family Court, Link Court Khairagarh, Rajnandgaon for divorce and the petitioner is seeking transfer of said case to Family Court, Dhamtari. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it is very painful and difficult to travel to Family Court, Khairagarh to attend each and every hearing of the case as distance between the two courts is too far. He also submits that the petitioner is residing with a small child aged about 6 years and it is not easy to go with him on every hearing at concerned Family Court. Therefore, the case of the respondent may be transferred to Family Court, Dhamtari for the convenience of the wife to participate in the proceedings. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent would oppose the prayer for transfer of the case. 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and also perused the documents annexed with the petition. 6. In the matter of N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs. A.S. Saravana Karthik (2022 SCC Online SC 1199) the Hon’ble Supreme Court has observed that generally it is wife’s convenience which must be looked at while considering transfer. It is held that 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 3 must be looked at while considering transfer. It is also held that when two or more proceedings are pending in different Courts between the same parties which raise common question of fact and law, and when the decisions in the cases are interdependent, it is desirable that they should be tried together by the same Judge so as to avoid multiplicity in trial of the same issues and conflict of decisions. 7. Having regard the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and in view of the aforesaid settled principle, this Court is inclined to allow the prayer made by the petitioner. 8. Consequently, the Transfer Petition is allowed and it is ordered that Case bearing Civil Suit No.32A/2025 pending before Family Court Link Court Khairagarh at Rajnandgaon be transferred to the Family Court, Dhamtari (CG) for its trial/disposal in accordance with law. 9. Both the parties shall remain present before the Family Court, Dhamtari on 24.03.2026. 10. The respondent/husband would be at liberty to participate in the proceedings through video conferencing/virtually unless otherwise directed by the concerned Court. 11. Pending application, if any, also stand disposed of. Sd/- /-Sd/- (Deepak Kumar Tiwari) Judge Ajay