Court Allows Transfer of Matrimonial Case to Pune: Convenience of Wife Given Priority. Bombay High Court emphasizes the importance of the wife's convenience in matrimonial proceedings.
Summary of Judgement
The Bombay High Court, on hearing arguments from both the Applicant (wife) and Respondent (husband), allowed the transfer of a matrimonial case from the Family Court in Bandra, Mumbai, to the Family Court in Pune. The Court highlighted the importance of the wife's convenience, especially considering her recent transfer to Pune for employment and her parents' residence in Sangli.
1. Hearing and Background
- The case was heard by the Bombay High Court on August 16, 2024. The Applicant sought to transfer the matrimonial proceedings initiated by her husband from Mumbai to Pune, citing convenience and proximity to her workplace.
2. Court’s Initial Order
- The Court initially directed the Applicant to provide evidence of her job transfer to Pune, to ensure that the application for transfer was not made frivolously.
3. Respondent’s Opposition
- The Respondent opposed the transfer, arguing that the Applicant’s request was merely an attempt to delay the proceedings. He cited Supreme Court decisions to support his claim that the transfer request should be denied.
4. Court’s Consideration
- The Court reviewed the evidence, including a letter from the Applicant’s employer confirming her transfer to Pune. It also examined the Supreme Court's guidelines on transferring matrimonial cases, particularly emphasizing the wife's convenience.
5. Importance of Wife’s Convenience
- The Court underscored that in matrimonial cases, the wife's convenience often takes precedence, especially when she is employed in a different city and lacks a place to stay in the original location of the proceedings.
6. Decision and Rationale
- Citing the Supreme Court's decision in N.C.V. Aishwarya vs. A.S. Saravana Karthik Sha, the Court ruled in favor of the Applicant, allowing the transfer of the matrimonial case to Pune.
7. Conclusion
- The Court dismissed the Respondent's objections, finding no merit in them, and ordered the transfer of the case, thereby prioritizing the wife’s convenience and ensuring that justice is served efficiently.
Case Title: Mrs. Minaxi Rohit Biradar alias Minaxi Sadashiv Muchandi Versus Mr. Rohit Bhimashankar Biradar.
Citation: 2024 LawText (BOM) (8) 304
Case Number: MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 371 OF 2024
Advocate(s): Mr. Shashank Shubham i/b. Bhavesh Kadam, Advocate for Applicant. Mr. Pradip Chavan, a/w. Ms. Shweta Borhade i/b. Pradip Chavan & Associates, Advocate for Respondent.
Date of Decision: 2024-08-30