Himachal Pradesh High Court: Sandeep Sharma, J. allowed a petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India with Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure to transfer the case from the court of learned Civil Judge, Sundernagar, to the court of learned District Judge, Kullu, District Kullu

The learned counsel for the petitioner, Amar Dev Sharma, pleaded that the petitioner being a lady has to travel from Kullu to Sundernagar and undergo great hardships in the process. Also, she apprehends some untoward incident and danger to her life and liberty at Sundernagar. He placed reliance on Urvashi Rana v. Himanshu Nayyar, 2016 SCC OnLine HP 2460 stating that the convenience of the wife is required to be considered over and above the inconvenience of the husband.

The Court relied on Rajani Kishor Pardeshi v. Kishor Babulal Pardeshi, (2005) 12 SCC 237 and held that the convenience of the wife is of prime consideration. Further, it is the duty of the Court to transfer the case if either of the parties feel that they are not likely to have a fair trial. The court also opined that the petitioner is unnecessarily being made to spend huge amount of money.

Taking into consideration, the fact that a petition under Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 can only be adjudicated by a Family Court and the jurisdiction of the matrimonial cases pertaining to Kullu District is with the Family Court at Mandi; the instant petition was allowed and the case was transferred to Kullu District Court. [Sunil Kaur v. Yashpal Singh, 2019 SCC OnLine HP 1398, decided on 30-08-2019]

Must Watch

maintenance to second wife

bail in false pretext of marriage

right to procreate of convict

Criminology, Penology and Victimology book release

Join the discussion

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.