Skip to content


Damyanti Devi Vs. Indrajeet - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtSupreme Court of India
Decided On
Case NumberTransfer Petition (Civil) No. 250 of 2006
Judge
AppellantDamyanti Devi
Respondentindrajeet
Excerpt:
- prevention of illicit traffic in narcotic drugs & psychotropic substances act, 1988 [c.a. 46/1988] section 3 & narcotic drugs & psychotropic substances act, 61/1985, section 37; [s.b. sinha & h.s. bedi, jj] preventive detection grant of bail - detenu already in custody co-accused of detenu not released on bail subjective satisfaction to detain reached without applying mind to facts of case held, mere fact that he had applied for bail, is not sufficient when n.d.p.s. act puts restriction on power to grant bail. fact that detenu has retracted his confession or that he had criminal antecedents, would not also be sufficient. detention order stands vitiated. [2002 cri lj 3519 (delhi) reversed]......j.1. this is an application filed at the instance of the wife 'damyanti devi' for transfer of divorce proceedings being divorce petition no. 417 of 2005, now pending before the family court, azamgarh, u.p. to the district court within delhi jurisdiction.2. we have heard the learned counsel for the parties and after going through the materials on record, we are not inclined to transfer the aforesaid divorce proceedings to the district court within delhi jurisdiction as we do not find from the transfer petition any allegation made against the husband by the wife nor of his relations harassing the petitioner while attending the court at azamgarh, u.p. however, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we direct that the husband- respondent shall pay a sum of rs. 5000/-.....
Judgment:

Tarun Chatterjee, J.

1. This is an application filed at the instance of the wife 'Damyanti Devi' for transfer of divorce proceedings being Divorce Petition No. 417 of 2005, now pending before the Family Court, Azamgarh, U.P. to the District Court within Delhi jurisdiction.

2. We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and after going through the materials on record, we are not inclined to transfer the aforesaid divorce proceedings to the District Court within Delhi jurisdiction as we do not find from the transfer petition any allegation made against the husband by the wife nor of his relations harassing the petitioner while attending the court at Azamgarh, U.P. However, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we direct that the husband- respondent shall pay a sum of Rs. 5000/- towards traveling and boarding expenses to the petitioner-wife with a companion for each attendance at Azamgarh Court. Such payment shall be made by the husband to the petitioner at least seven days prior to her attendance in Azamgarh Court. With these observations, the transfer petitioner is disposed of with no order as to costs.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //