Smt. Sarika Meena vs Pankaj on 1 September, 2017

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Transfer Appl. No. 67 / 2017
Smt. Sarika Meena W/o Shri Pankaj Meena D/o Shri Chandra
Prakash Meena, age 30 years, R/o 1-I-21, near Shiv Jyoti Convent
Government School, Mahaveer Nagar Vistar Yojana, Kota (Raj.)
—-Petitioner
Versus
Shri Pankaj S/o Shri Ranjeet Meena, R/o Jyoti Colony, Uccha Tehsil
Jahajpur at present Village Suvana, Tehsil Suvana, District-
Bhilwara
—-Respondent
__
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ramniwas Choudhary
For Respondent(s) : None present
__
HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VIRENDRA KUMAR MATHUR
Judgment
01/09/2017

This S.B. Civil Transfer Application was filed under Section 24

of Civil Procedure Code 1908 for transferring the Case

No.217/2016 (441/2015) Pankaj Vs. Smt. Sarika Meena, pending

before Family Court, Bhilwara to Family Court, Kota.

Briefly stated, after the marriage, the respondent started

harassing and petitioner for demand of dowry on this complaint

under Section 498A, 406 IPC against the respondent was filed

before Judicial Magistrate No.3 Kota. After investigation challan

was filed against the respondent and trial is pending before Addl.

Judicial Magistrate No.2 (North), Kota.

The petitioner has also filed a complaint under Section 12 of

the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005

against the respondent before the Judicial Magistrate No.5, Kota.
(2 of 3)
[CTA-67/2017]

In counter blast respondent has also filed an application

under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955 against the

petitioner for Restitution of Conjugal Rights before the Family

Court, Bhilwara and the same is pending.

It was contended that father of the petitioner is agriculturist

and her brothers are in Government Job and petitioner’s mother is

a house wife.

In these circumstances, it is very difficult for her to travel all

alone to contest the case before Family Court, Bhilwara and she is

also receiving regular threatening from respondent-husband.

There is no one to go along with her. The notices sent to

respondent received duly served but no one has appeared on

behalf of the respondent.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. After the marriage

the relation between the parties did not remain cordial.

Respondent started harassing her and always demanded dowry

from her parents. On this complaint under Section 498A, 406 IPC

was filed against the respondent before the Judicial Magistrate

No.3, Kota. After investigation challan was filed and trial is

pending before the Addl. Judicial Magistrate No.2, Kota. One

complaint under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from

Domestic Violence Act, 2005 against the respondent has also been

filed which is pending before the Judicial Magistrate No.5, Kota.

In counter blast an application under Section 9 of the Hindu

Marriage Act 1955 for restitution of conjugal rights has been filed

by the respondent. Presently, the petitioner is living with her

parents and the father of the petitioner was said to be agriculturist
(3 of 3)
[CTA-67/2017]

and her brothers are in Government Job. Under these

circumstances it is not convenient for her to go all alone to contest

petition pending before Family Court, Bhilwara on each date of

hearing.

In the facts and circumstances of the present case, the

inconvenience of petitioner lady has to be taken into

consideration. In view of the ratio of the judgment of Hon’ble

Supreme Court in Vaishali Shridhar Jagtap Vs. Shridhar

Vishwanath Jagtap reported in 2016 (4) WLN 237 (SC) and it

is a fit case to be transferred.

Accordingly, this Transfer Application is allowed and the Civil

Misc. Case No.217/2016 (441/2015) (Pankaj Vs. Smt. Sarika

Meena) filed by the respondent for restitution of conjugal rights

under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, pending before the

Family Court, Bhilwara is ordered to be transferred to the Family

Court, Kota.

(DR. VIRENDRA KUMAR MATHUR), J.

Ravi Kh./21

Leave a Comment

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