Nibedita Mukherjee vs Joseph Bikash Bagh on 18 July, 2017

1

In The High Court At Calcutta
18-07- Civil Revisional Jurisdiction
2017
sh-7 CO 2070 of 2017
. Nibedita Mukherjee
v.

Joseph Bikash Bagh

Mr. Fazle Rabi
… for the petitioner.

Ms. Ameena Kabir
… for the opposite party.

In this application under Section 24 of the Code of

Civil Procedure, 1908 the petitioner/wife has prayed for,

transfer of the matrimonial suit filed by the opposite

party/husband and pending before the Court of the

learned Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court(II) at

Sealdah to the learned Additional District Judge at

Bolpur, Birbhum.

It is the case of the petitioner that after being

compelled to leave the matrimonial home she is presently

residing at Bolpur and she has very recently joined as a

primary teacher of a government school at Bolpur. Before

filing of the matrimonial suit she had already filed a

proceeding under Section 125 Criminal Procedure Code,
2

1973 before the learned Additional Chief Judicial

Magistrate, Bolpur, Birbhum and an application for

execution of an order passed in the said Section 125

proceeding is pending before the learned Additional Chief

Judicial Magistrate, Birbhum and the opposite party who

is contesting the said proceeding has also filed an

application under Section 127 of the Criminal Procedure

Code which is also pending before the appropriate Court

at Bolpur. A proceeding under Section 498A and Sections

3 /4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act initiated against the

opposite party is also pending before the learned Chief

Judicial Magistrate at Bolpur, Birbhum and the opposite

party is also contesting the said proceeding. According to

READ  Ankush Bhiku Pandhare vs The State Of Maharashtra on 9 May, 2017

the petitioner, she will face great hardship to contest the

matrimonial suit before the learned Additional District

Judge, Fast Track Court(II) at Sealdah by travelling the

long distance of more than 150 kilometers each way

between Bolpur and Sealdah. In support of the prayer

made by the petitioner reliance was also placed on the

decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Tejalben v.

Mihirbhai Bharatbhai Kothari, reported in AIR 2016 SC

718.

A copy of the revisional application was served upon
3

the opposite party and he is represented by Ms. Ameena

Kabir. Ms. Kabir submitted that if the matrimonial suit is

transferred to the Court of the learned Additional District

Judge, Bolpur, Birbhum the opposite party will face

difficulty because in order to contest the criminal

proceeding and to proceed with the matrimonial suit he

has to obtain frequent leave for a long period from the

school where he is employed as a teacher.

Having considered the facts of the case and in view

of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of

Tejalben(supra), I find that when the criminal proceedings

initiated by the present petitioner are already pending

before the competent Courts at Bolpur and the opposite

party has been contesting the said proceeding without any

difficulty, the petitioner has substantiated a ground for

transfer of the matrimonial suit as prayed for in this

application. This view is fortified by the decision of the

Supreme Court in the case of Tejalben (supra).

Accordingly, the Matrimonial Suit No. 73 of 2016

( Joseph Bikash Bagh v. Nibedita Mukherjee) is withdrawn

READ  Vikaramsinh vs Unknown on 23 August, 2010

from the Court of the learned Additional District Judge,

Fast Track Court(II) at Sealdah and the same is

transferred to the Court of the learned Additional District
4

Judge at Bolpur, Birbhum.

The learned Additional District Judge, Fast Track

Court (II) at Sealdah is directed to forthwith transmit all

the records of the Matrimonial Suit No. 73 of 2016

( Joseph Bikash Bagh v. Nibedita Mukherjee) to the Court

of the learned District Judge, Birbhum, who shall, in turn,

transmit the same to the Court of the learned Additional

District Judge, Bolpur, Birbhum.

It appears that the petitioner has not yet filed her

written statement in the suit. The petitioner is directed to

file her written statement in the matrimonial suit, before

the transferee Court within a period of two weeks from the

date of receipt of the notice of arrival of the records of the

matrimonial suit.

In the facts of the present case, the learned

Additional District Judge, Bolpur, Birbhum is requested to

make an endeavour for expeditious disposal of the

matrimonial suit, preferably within a period of six months

from the date of receipt of the matrimonial suit. The

learned Additional District Judge, Bolpur, Birbhum is also

requested to dispose of the matrimonial suit by way of day

to day hearing, subject to the convenience of the Court.

With the above directions, CO 2070 of 2017 stands
5

disposed of. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

Certified website copies of the order, if applied for,

be urgently made available to the parties on usual

READ  Sarojini And Ors vs State Of M.P. And Ors on 16 October, 1992

undertaking.

(Ashis Kumar Chakraborty, J)

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *