Smt. Poonam Rathore vs Ajay Singh on 25 October, 2017

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Transfer Appl. No. 100 / 2017
Smt. Poonam Rathore D/o Shri Bhanwar Singh, By Caste Rathore,
R/o – Atroli House, Behind R.T. Office, House No. 28, Gulab Nagar-
A, Jodhpur.
—-Petitioner
Versus
Ajay Singh S/o Shri Laxman Singh, By Caste Kangrot (Rajput),
R/o Plot No. 57-58-, Bhojpura House, Bhilwara Road, Indra Colony
Amet, Rajsamand.
—-Respondent
__
For Petitioner(s) : Mr Sabir Khan
For Respondent(s) : Mr A.K. Babel
__
HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VIRENDRA KUMAR MATHUR
Judgment
25/10/2017

This Transfer Application under sec.24 CPC has been filed for

transfer of Civil Misc. Case No.42/2017 (Ajay Singh v. Smt

Poonam Rathore) pending under sec.13 of the Hindu Marriage Act

before the Family Court, Rajsamand.

Briefly stated, marriage between the parties was solemnized

on 29.01.2007 at Jodhpur. After the marriage, the petitioner was

blessed with a girl child. It was contended that she was harassed

on account of demand of dowry by the respondent and his other

family members. She was forced to live with her parents at

Jodhpur. The petitioner thereafter filed an FIR against the

respondent and his family members before Women Police Station

(East), Jodhpur under secs.498A, 406, 323 IPC. The respondent

has filed an application under sec.13 of the Hindu Marriage Act for
(2 of 4)
[CTA-100/2017]

dissolution of the marriage. It was contended that the petitioner

being a lady has to face comparatively greater hardship in

contesting the case at Rajsamand because she has to travel all

alone with her minor daughter of 9 years age. The respondent

husband has also threatened the petitioner that if she appears in

the court at Rajsamand, she has to face dire consequences,

therefore, her life liberty has been put to danger.

Notices of petition issued to respondent were duly served

and the respondent has appeared through his counsel and has

filed reply to the Transfer Application. The respondent has denied

averments of the application and submitted that the applicant was

never subjected to any harassment or cruelty on account of

dowry. It was also submitted that on account of cruel behaviour of

the applicant towards answering respondent and his family

members, after having failed in so many attempts for

reconciliation with the applicant, the answering respondent was

left with no option but to file a divorce petition under sec.13 of the

Hindu Marriage Act. It was also submitted that the answering

respondent never gave any threat to the applicant as alleged in

the application. Rather, the answering respondent is a peaceful

and law-abiding citizen and he was compelled to file the divorce

petition against applicant.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and considered the

rival submissions.

After the marriage, a girl child born out of the wedlock.

Thereafter, relation between the parties remained strained and on

the ground of dowry, the petitioner was subjected to mental
(3 of 4)
[CTA-100/2017]

physical cruelty and therefore, a complaint was filed by her

against the respondent under secs.498A, 406, 323 IPC. The

complaint is pending investigation. The respondent-husband has

filed a divorce petition under sec.13 of the Hindu Marriage Act

before the Family Court, Rajsamand for dissolution of the

marriage. Presently, the petitioner is residing with her parents at

Jodhpur. She has to travel all alone with her minor girl child to

contest the case filed by the respondent for dissolution of the

marriage before Family Judge, Rajsamand, specially in the

circumstances when she has no independent source of income.

The petitioner has further alleged that she has received threats

from the respondent to face dire consequences if she appears

before the Family Judge, Rajsamand.

The respondent has denied the fact of giving threat. The

applicant, apart from making allegations has not placed any proof

on record so as to substantiate the same. The counsel for the

applicant has argued transfer of the Divorce Petition from

Rajsamand to Jodhpur only on the ground that the petitioner

being a lady has to face greater hardship in travelling all alone

with minor girl child, specially under the circumstances when she

has no independent source of income. The respondent has not

confronted this submission and no material either has been placed

by answering respondent from which comparative hardship may

be inferred in his favour.

The counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on various

decisions of this Court considering comparative hardship in favour

of applicant-wife and has also placed reliance on judgment of
(4 of 4)
[CTA-100/2017]

Hon’ble Supreme Court in Vaishali Shridhar Jagtap v. Shridhar

Vishwanath Jagtap decided on 08.07.2016.

Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, the

inconvenience of the petitioner lady has to be considered. In view

of the above and in light of judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in

Vaishali Shridhar Jagtap v. Shridhar Vishwanath Jagtap

reported in 2016 (4) WLN 237 (SC), it is a fit case to be

transferred.

Accordingly, this Transfer Application is allowed and the Civil

Misc. Case No.42/2017 (Ajay Singh v. Smt Poonam Rathore), filed

by the respondent under sec.13 of the Hindu Marriage Act,

pending before the Family Court, Rajsamand is ordered to be

transferred to the Family Court, Jodhpur.

(DR. VIRENDRA KUMAR MATHUR), J.

mma/42

Leave a Comment

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