Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Karnataka
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Smt T V Shaila Urs vs Mr Harsha

High Court Of Karnataka|17 January, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17th DAY OF JANUARY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE CIVIL PETITION NO.108 OF 2018 BETWEEN:
SMT T.V.SHAILA URS W/O HARSHA D/O LATE VENKATRAJ URS AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS C/O. T.R.GANGARAJ URS VIJAYANAGAR 1ST CROSS NEAR WATER TANK HOSAMANE BADAVANE CHIKAMAGALUR-577101. … PETITIONER (BY SRI.A.MADHUSUDHANARAO, ADV.) AND:
MR.HARSHA S/O M.S.BETAGIRI AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS R/O RAJENDRA EXTENSION OPP. BANASHANKARI TEMPLE SHAKTHI NAGARA DAVANAGERE TOWN WORKING AT: NEW TOWN GARAGE SAGAR ROAD, SHIVAMOGGA CITY. … RESPONDENT (RESPONDENT SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 24 OF CPC, PRAYING THIS HON’BLE COURT TO TRANSFER MC NO. 149/2017 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT AGAINST THE PETITIONER WHICH IS PENDING IN THE COURT OF THE HON’BLE DISTRICT JUDGE, FAMILY COURT AT SHIVAMOGGA, TO FAMILY COURT AT CHICKMAGALUR AND ALLOW THIS PETITION WITH COST AND GRANT SICH OTHER RELIEFS AS THIS HON’BLE COURT DEEMS FIT, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ‘ADMISSION’ THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Sri. A Madhusudhana Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner. None for respondent though served.
2. The civil petition is admitted for hearing, with consent of the parties, the same is heard finally.
3. This petition is filed under Section 24 the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘çode’ for short), seeking transfer of the proceedings instituted by the respondent under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’ for short) from the Family Court at Shivamoga to the Family Court at Chickmagalur.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is a household woman and has no source of income. It is further submitted that the petitioner is required to take care of her old mother aged 70 years and she cannot travel alone. The distance between the aforesaid places is stated to be 90 kms. Therefore, the proceedings is instituted by the respondent under Section 13 of the Act, 1955 for transfer of the case from Shivamogga to CHickmagalur.
5. I have perused the records.
6. It is well settled in law that though Section 24 of the Code confers power on Court to transfer proceeding, yet this power has to be exercised with circumspection and care. Convenience of the parties has to be taken into account. In the decision of Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of ‘SMT ABHILASHA CHOURASIYA vs. VIJAY KUMAR CHOURASIYA’, decided in MCC No.495/2014. In the case of ‘RAJWINDER KAUR vs. BALWINDER SINGH’ in (2003) 11 SCC 726, Hon’ble Supreme Court had directed transfer of proceeding taking into account the fact that wife was required to travel long distance and was required to take care of daughter aged four years. Similarly, in the case of ‘SUMITA SINGH vs. KUMAR SANJAY AND ANOTHER’ in AIR 2002 SC 396, Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that it was the husband’s suit against wife and, therefore, convenience of wife has to be taken into account and in the case of ‘RAJANI KISHOR PARDESHI VS. KISHOR BABULAL PARDESHI’ (2005) 12 SCC 237, wherein it has been held that in a matrimonial dispute, convenience of the wife is of the paramount consideration, the proceeding instituted by the respondent under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act deserves to be transferred.
7. In view of the enunciation of law and taking into account that the respondent has already contested the proceedings under Section 125 of the Code at Shivamogga, I deem it appropriate to direct transfer of the proceedings instituted by the respondent from Shivamogga to Chickmagalur.
8. Accordingly, it is directed that the proceeding instituted by the respondent under Section 13 of the Act, 1955 in M.C.No.149/2017 which is pending before the Family Court at Shivamogga shall stand transferred to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Chickmagalur. The Court at Chickmagalur shall decide the proceeding expeditiously bearing in mind the legitimate mandate contained in Section 21(b) of the Act, 1955.
Accordingly, the petition is disposed of Sd/- JUDGE brn
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Smt T V Shaila Urs vs Mr Harsha

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
17 January, 2019
Judges
  • Alok Aradhe