1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR :ORDER
: S.B.CIVIL TRANSFER PETITION NO.39/2014 Basanti @ Jaya versus Jai Kant Date of Order :: 01.07.2014 PRESENT HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI Mr.S.K.Verma, for the petitioner.
Mr.Harish Purohit, for the respondent.
---- BY THE COURT: Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The present transfer petition has been filed by the petitioner-wife, inter alia, with the averments that marriage between the parties was solemnized on 09.12.2012 and subsequent thereto proceedings under Section 498(A).406, 120-B, 354, 323, 109, 312 IPC were initiated by the petitioner, application under Section 125 Cr.P.C.was filed by her before the Family Court, Churu and another proceeding under provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 was initiated which are pending at Sujangarh, however, subsequent thereto the respondent-husband has initiated proceedings for dissolution of marriage by filing application before the Family Court, Bikaner.
It is, inter alia, also indicated that father of the petitioner is aged about 62 years and her two brothers are settled at Mumbai, the distance Sujangarh and Bikaner is about 170 Km.
2 and the petitioner would be required to travel to the said Court time and again alongwith her father and, therefore, a prayer has been made that the proceeding deserves to be transferred to the Family Court, Churu.
Learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated submissions made in the petition and further submitted that as other proceedings are already pending at Sujangarh/Churu, which the respondent is required to attend, it would be appropriate that the present proceedings are transferred from Bikaner to the Family Court, Churu.
Though no reply has been filed to the petition, learned counsel for the respondent opposed the prayer made in the petition and submitted that merely on account of inconvenience of the petitioner, the proceedings cannot be transferred.
I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties.
It is not in dispute that certain proceedings initiated by the petitioner are pending before Courts at Sujangarh, which fall within Churu District/Churu and the respondent is required to attend those proceedings.
The subsequent proceedings regarding dissolution of marriage has been initiated by the respondent at Family Court, Bikaner and it would be in fitness of things that the proceedings pending at Bikaner are also transferred to the Family Court, Churu, which is not likely to cause any inconvenience to the respondent as even otherwise is required to attend the proceedings initiated by the petitioner before the said Court.
3 In view of the above discussion, the petition is allowed.
The Civil Misc.
Case No.479/2013 (Jai Kant v.
Basanti) pending before the Family Court, Bikaner is ordered to be transferred to the Family Court, Churu.
Parties shall remain present before the Family Court, Churu on 04.08.2014.
Record of the case be immediately transmitted by the Family Court, Bikaner to the Family Court, Churu.
The stay petition also stands disposed of accordingly.
(ARUN BHANSALI).J.
PKS-11