IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ASHOK G. NIJAGANNAVAR CIVIL PETITION NO.127 OF 2015 BETWEEN:
SMT.A.UMA RAJINI, W/O SRI S ASHOK KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, R/O 07/993, GANGARAM DORAIRAJ ST. NEAR BALAR ILLAM, NAGAMALAI, MADURAI – 652 019. …PETITIONER (BY SRI.S.KASINAGALINGAM, ADVOCATE - ABSENT) AND:
SRI S.ASHOK KUMAR, S/O A.R.SUNDARAJAN, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/O NO.16, I FLOOR, V.P.ROAD, II CROSS, MADIVALA, BENGALURU – 560068. ...RESPONDENT (BY SRI.C.S.RAVISHANKAR, ADVOCATE) **** THIS CIVIL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 22 AMD 23(3) OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, PRAYING TO TRANSFER THE SUIT IN G AND WC NO.198/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT AT BANGALORE TO THE HON’BLE COURT OF THE FAMILY JUDGE AT MADURAI, TAMILNADU.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Heard learned counsel for the respondent.
2. No representation by the counsel for the petitioner.
3. This petition is filed under Section 22 and 23(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure for transfer of suit in G&WC No.198/2014 on the file of the Principal Judge, Family Court, Bangalore, to the Court of Family Judge at Madurai, Tamilnadu.
4. Section 23(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure reads as under:
23(3). Where such Courts are subordinate to different High Courts, the application shall be made to the High Court within the local limits of whose jurisdiction the Court in which the suit is brought is situate. In view of the aforesaid provision, this Court may exercise the jurisdiction since G&WC No.198/2014 was filed before the Family Court, Bangalore.
5. In the present case, the relief claimed is for transfer of a petition pending before the Court in one State to a Court in another State.
6. But, in view of Section 25 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the application shall have to be made before the Hon’ble Supreme Court when the prayer is for transfer of the suit / G&WC petition from one District Court in one State to a High Court or other Civil Court in any other State.
7. Thus, this Court cannot exercise the jurisdiction for granting the relief claimed by the petitioner.
8. This Court had no opportunity to hear the submission of the counsel for the petitioner.
9. No grounds are made out to prove that this Court has got jurisdiction to try application and to grant the relief claimed. In addition to that, there are no other valid grounds for transfer of the petition as prayed for.
Hence, the civil petition is dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE SJ