Court No. - 1
Case :- TRANSFER APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 283 of 2021 Applicant :- Shivali Gupta Alias Shivali Agarwal Opposite Party :- Ajay Kumar S/O Late Manohar Lal Agarwal Counsel for Applicant :- Arvind Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- Ishir Sripat
Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J.
Heard Mr. Arvind Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Ishir Sripat, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 and 2.
This application under Section 24 Code of Civil Procedure, seeks transfer of O.S. No.199 of 2021, Ajay Kumar and Another Vs. Arpit Kumar Agrawal and Others from the Court of the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No.4, Ghaziabad to the Judgeship of Kanpur Nagar for trial there in accordance with law.
The suit has been instituted by the plaintiff-respondent Nos. 1 and 2, who are the father-in-law and mother-in-law of applicant No.1. Applicant Nos. 2, 3 and 4 are the father, mother and sister of the first applicant. The first applicant's husband, who has been arrayed as defendant to the suit lives in the United States. The suit has been filed to forbid the plaintiff-opposite party's daughter-in-law from entering her matrimonial home, which the learned counsel for the applicant says is the couple's shared household. The first applicant has instituted Case No.951 of 2021 Mrs. Shivali Agrawal Vs. Dr. Arpit Kumar Agrawal under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005 before the Court of the Metropolitan Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar against her husband, father-in-law, mother-in-law and sister-in-law. Apart from the said case, an application for maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C has been instituted by applicant No.1 before the Family Court at Kanpur Nagar.
It is submitted on behalf of applicant No.1 that she finds it very difficult to defend at Ghaziabad given her family profile, the distance between the two stations that is more than 400 Kms. and the harassment and threat that she faces at Ghaziabad because of her in-laws. In connection with the allegations of threat, learned counsel for the applicant has drawn the attention of the Court to the application dated 16.02.2021, a copy of which is annexed as Annexure No.7 to the affidavit.
A perusal of the said application shows that she has addressed a complaint to the Station House Officer, Nandgram, Ghaziabad to the effect that after marriage, her husband left for the U.S. on 06.12.2020 and did not make any efforts to secure a Visa for her, despite a request in that behalf by her and her parents. She has also said in that application that the applicant No.1 was residing with her in-laws at Ghaziabad, but was subjected to loads of mental and physical harassment by her husband and in- laws. She was forced to leave her matrimonial home. She had requested to leave the in-laws home with her belongings, which includes her clothes and jewellery, which the in-laws have refused to give. It is impressed upon the Court that this complaint shows the adverse circumstances that the in-laws created in order to throw out applicant No.1 from her matrimonial home. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the plaintiff-opposite parties in connivance with their son are deliberately harassing the first applicant so as to get rid of the matrimonial bonds between applicant No.1 and the son of opposite party Nos.1 and 2. It is submitted that the case sought to be transferred from Ghaziabad to Kanpur Nagar is an endeavour in that direction. It is urged as a ground for transfer the threat perception that the wife says she faces at Ghaziabad. It is urged that two cases are pending between applicant No.1 and her husband at Kanpur Nagar, which have to be effectively defended by opposite party Nos. 1 and 2 as the first applicant's husband is domiciled in the United States. They have to appear before the Court at Kanpur Nagar. Also, a case under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005 has been registered against her father-in-law and mother- in-law as opposite parties and, therefore, they have to attend the proceedings at Kanpur Nagar. In this view of the matter, if all the three cases are heard at Kanpur Nagar, it would be convenient to all parties. Rather, it would be inconvenient to both parties if she is required to defend the present suit at Ghaziabad while in the other two cases, opposite party Nos. 1 and 2 would come over to Kanpur to defend themselves or the first applicant's husband, who is away from the country.
It is also urged that the wife finds it difficult without any maintenance being paid to her by her husband and without any source of livelihood to defend the proceedings at Ghaziabad, 400 Kms. away from Kanpur Nagar where she stays with her old parents.
This Court has considered the matter carefully. It is apparent that the issue that appears to be between opposite party Nos. 1 and 2 seeking to injunct the daughter-in-law from entering the matrimonial home or the in-laws home is in fact a manifestation of the matrimonial discord between the applicant No.1 and her husband, who is the son of opposite party Nos. 1 and 2, plaintiffs of the suit. It appears to be true, this observation being limited to the purpose of the present transfer application that the opposite parties' son, who is domiciled in the United States is in connivance with his parents to harass the first applicant. The first applicant has instituted two proceedings against her husband, one of which also includes her in-laws at Kanpur Nagar. The present suit is a part and parcel of this ongoing matrimonial strife between the applicant and her husband. Opposite party Nos.1 and 2 have deliberately taken up cudgels on behalf of their son and against his wife, that is applicant No.1.
The present suit for injunction seeking a sought transfer cannot, therefore, be viewed as a cause unrelated to the matrimonial dispute between the applicant and her husband. There are already two cases pending at the instance of applicant No.1 at Kanpur Nagar where opposite party Nos. 1 and 2 have to appear and defend themselves; in one on behalf of their son and in the other as parties. Therefore, if the present suit is also transferred from Ghaziabad to Kanpur Nagar, it would be convenient for all parties to suit all the cases together, where they can request the Court's concerned for a uniform date in all matters. At the same time, it cannot be ignored that the wife does not appear to have any source of livelihood. She has applied for grant of maintenance but it does not appear to have been awarded so far. In the circumstances, it would be difficult for her to effectively defend the suit at Ghaziabad, located 400 Kms. away from the place of her ordinary domicile, that is, Kanpur Nagar where she stays with her parents.
In the totality of the circumstances, this Court is of opinion that a case for transfer is well made out.
In the result, this Transfer Application succeeds and is allowed. Original Suit No. 199 of 2021, Ajay Kumar and Another Vs. Arpit Kumar Agrawal and Others is withdrawn from the Court of the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No.4, Ghaziabad and transferred to the Judgeship of Kanpur Nagar where the District Judge, Kanpur Nagar is directed to assign the suit to a Court of competent jurisdiction. The Court at Kanpur Nagar to which the suit is assigned shall proceed to try and decide the suit, in accordance with law after putting all parties to notice, expeditiously.
There shall be no orders as to costs.
Order Date :- 24.9.2021 NSC Note: Since my digital signature has expired and its renewal will take some time, the print out of the judgment has been taken and has been manually signed by me. This copy be uploaded with the stipulation as and when the digital signature is renewed or a fresh digital signature is obtained, the digital signature copy be uploaded after deleting the scanned copy.