Bombay High Court C vs R/O. Ashti, Tq. Partur on 14 August, 2012Bench: S. S. Shinde

1 mca24.12

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

rt

MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO.24 OF 2012 ou

Sau. Mangal w/o Ambadas Gaikwad, Age: 25 years, Occ: Household, R/o. at present resident of

C/o. Baburao Bajirao Jadhav, C

K.S.K. College, Mitra Nagar, Beed. …APPLICANT VERSUS

h

1. Ambadas s/o Kachru Gaikwad, ig

Age: 32 years, Occ: Service, R/o. Avhane (Kh), Tq. Shevgaon, District Ahmednagar.

At present R/o. Takli Dhokeshwar, H

Tq. Parner, Dist. Ahmednagar.

2. Ravi s/o Subhash Gaikwad, Age: 27 years, Occ: Business, y

R/o. Ashti, Tq. Partur,

District Jalna. …RESPONDENTS ba

…

Mr. Milind M. Patil (Beedkar), Advocate for the applicant.

om

Mr. N.B. Narwade, Advocate for respondent No.1. Respondent No. 2 : Served.

…

CORAM: S.S. SHINDE, J.

B

DATE : 14TH AUGUST, 2012

ORAL JUDGMENT :

. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. ::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 18:59:19 ::: 2 mca24.12

Heard finally with consent of the parties. rt

2. This application is filed seeking ou

transfer of Hindu Marriage Petition No. 56 of 2012 pending on the file of the Court of 5th Joint C

Civil Judge, Senior Division, Ahmednagar to the Court of the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Beed. h

3. The background facts as disclosed in this ig

application for filing the same, are as under. H

. The marriage of the applicant and y

respondent No.1 was solemnized at Beed on 22nd ba

January, 2006. A son by name “Om” is begotten out of their wedlock, who is five years old and om

staying with the applicant at Beed. . It is the case of the applicant that, B

after marriage, she went to her husband’s house at Avhane (Kh.) District Ahmednagar and was treated well by respondent No.1 and his family members initially for one month and thereafter started ::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 18:59:19 ::: 3 mca24.12

illtreatment to her. It is further case of the applicant that, after shifting to Ahmednagar, the rt

respondent-husband and his family members demanded ou

Rs.2,00,000/- for purchasing flat and furniture. She was being insulted and illtreated by the C

husband and his relatives. It is further case of the applicant that, by consuming liquor, the respondent-husband used to beat her. After h

delivery of a child, the respondent-husband ig

demanded Rs.2,00,000/- from father of the H

applicant and in case, such demand is not fulfilled, the respondent-husband threatened the y

applicant that, the applicant has to go back to ba

her parent’s house.It is the case of the applicant that, on non fulfillment of the demand of the om

respondent-husband, the applicant was driven out from matrimonial house and therefore, she went to reside with her parents. It is further case of the B

applicant that, on 25th June, 2011 the husband alongwith his relatives came to her maternal house at Beed and beaten her. Therefore, the applicant filed complaint being Regular Criminal Case No.502 ::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 18:59:19 ::: 4 mca24.12

of 2011 for the offence punishable under sections 498A, 452, 324, 323, 504, 506(II) of the Indian rt

Penal Code against the husband and his relatives ou

in the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Beed and same is pending. The applicant has filed C

an application for granting monthly maintenance under section 125 of the Criminal Procedure against her husband which is also pending in the h

Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Beed. The ig

applicant has also filed proceedings under section H

12 of the Women’s Domestic Violence Protection Act, 2005 against the respondent-husband and his y

relatives in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate, ba

First Class, Beed and same is pending. om

3. It is the case of the applicant that, the respondent-husband only with intention to harass the applicant, has filed Hindu Marriage Petition B

No. 56 of 2012 in the Court of the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Ahmednagar under section 13(1) (ia)(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for divorce. It is further case of the applicant that, ::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 18:59:19 ::: 5 mca24.12

said divorce petition is filed by the respondent- husband on false and fabricated grounds including rt

the very wild and ugly allegations of the illicit ou

relations between applicant and present respondent No.2. It is case of the applicant that, such C

allegations are nothing but an attempt to pressurize the applicant who has filed the criminal proceedings against the respondent- h

husband and his relatives.

ig

H

. The summons from the Court of 5th Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Ahmednagar is y

received by the applicant at Beed. This ba

application is filed for transfer of the proceedings from Ahmednagar to Beed. om

4. The Counsel for the applicant submits that, the applicant has no independent source of B

income, she is dependent and living under the shelter and mercy of her father at Beed. The learned Counsel for the applicant submits that, recently, she is appointed as Peon in the office ::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 18:59:19 ::: 6 mca24.12

of the Taluka Inspector of Land Records, Paranda District Osmanabad. It is submitted that, she has rt

to look after her son who is school going small ou

child. Her father being Government servant, is unable to accompany the applicant for attending C

the dates in the Court at Ahmednagar, which is more than 120 Kms., from Beed. She has also apprehension and threat to her life and her son at h

the hands of the respondent-husband and his ig

relatives at Ahmednagar. It is submitted that, the H

marriage was performed at Beed and since the applicant was driven out by respondent NO.1, she y

is forced to stay at Beed. Therefore, considering ba

the aforesaid facts and circumstances and in the interest of justice, it is expedient to transfer om

Hindu Marriage Petition No. 56 of 2012 from the Court of 5th Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Ahmednagar to the Court of the Civil Judge, Senior B

Division, Beed. The learned Counsel appearing for the applicant invited my attention to the grounds taken in the application and submitted that, this application may be allowed.

::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 18:59:19 ::: 7 mca24.12

. In support of the contention that, the rt

convenience of the wife should be looked into, in ou

a proceedings filed by the husband, the learned Counsel for the applicant pressed into service C

reported judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Sumita Singh vs. Kumar Sanjay [AIR 2002 SC 396] h

and also another reported judgment of this Court in the case of Anisha Sanjay Hinduja vs. Sanjay ig

Shrichand Hinduja [2003(supp.) Bom.C.R. 802]. H

5. On the other hand, the learned Counsel y

appearing for the respondent-husband invited my ba

attention to the contentions raised in the affidavit in reply and submitted that, the om

allegations made by the applicant in the application are denied in toto. It is submitted that, the facts in the case of Sumita Singh B

(supra) can be distinguished since distance in that case was 1100 Kms., The learned Counsel further submits that, baseless allegations are made in the application. It is submitted that, at ::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 18:59:19 ::: 8 mca24.12

no point of time, the respondent-husband has illtreated or demanded any amount from the father rt

of the applicant for purchasing flat or furniture. ou

It is further submitted that, at no point of time, the respondent-husband has insulted the applicant C

or asked her father or other relatives to pay any amount. She was not driven out from the matrimonial house. It is submitted that, the h

applicant has instituted various proceedings at ig

Beed just to harass the respondent, since the H

respondent has filed Hindu Marriage Petition No. 56 of 2012. It is submitted that, the y

allegation that if the applicant travels to ba

Ahmednagar, there is threat to her life, is devoid of any merits. On the contrary, father of the om

applicant and relatives have assaulted the respondent twice. He has filed complaint in the Police Station, Paithan and Shevgaon. B

. It is submitted that, the applicant was insisting to leave village Avahane and therefore, the respondent shifted to Ahmednagar, however, at ::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 18:59:19 ::: 9 mca24.12

Ahmednagar also, the applicant did not behave properly with the respondent-husband. It is rt

submitted that, the respondent-husband started ou

residing at Ahmednagar, however, in the month of June, the parents of the applicant came to the C

house of respondent and left the house by taking all golden ornaments and cash amount and also the applicant. It is submitted that, on many h

occasions, the respondent requested the parents of ig

the applicant to send the applicant to the H

matrimonial house, however, they told the respondent that, after delivery of child, they y

will send the applicant back to the husband, but ba

they did not do so. It is submitted that, all the relatives of the respondent tried to made sincere om

efforts to bring back the applicant to the house of the respondent-husband, however, she did not turn up. It is submitted that, the respondent was B

beaten by the relatives of the applicant. The learned Counsel also invited my attention to other contentions raised in the affidavit in reply and submitted that, the respondent-husband is ready to ::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 18:59:19 ::: 10 mca24.12

take the custody of minor son and to maintain him. It is submitted that, at present, the respondent rt

is serving at Takali Dhokeshwar, 36 Kms. away from ou

Ahmednagar, and therefore, it is not the case that, the respondent is staying at Ahmednagar. C

Therefore, relying upon the averments in the affidavit in reply, annexures thereto and oral submissions, the learned Counsel for the h

respondent-husband submits that, the Court at ig

Ahmednagar has territorial jurisdiction to deal H

with the pending proceedings, therefore, this Court may not interfere.

y

ba

6. I have given anxious consideration to the rival submissions. Upon careful perusal of the om

application, grounds which are agitated by the applicant are that, it is inconvenient for the applicant to travel to Ahmednagar, since the B

distance is 120 Kms., from Beed to Ahmednagar; secondly, there is a minor child of five years and the applicant has to look after him and his interest; thirdly, at least three proceedings ::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 18:59:19 ::: 11 mca24.12

instituted by the applicant are pending at Beed where the husband is attending those proceedings; rt

fourthly, there is a threat of eminent danger if ou

the applicant travels to Ahmednagar and attend the proceedings. Therefore, in my opinion, though the C

allegations are denied by the respondent-husband, however, in stead of entering into the allegations and denial, in a proceedings initiated by the h

husband, convenience of the wife should be looked ig

into, as held by the Supreme Court in the case of H

Sumita Singh (supra), and also another reason that, there is five years minor child and the y

applicant has to look after that child. These are ba

two main grounds, apart from other grounds raised by the applicant, which would tilt the balance of om

convenience in favour of the applicant.

7. Though the applicant is serving as Peon B

at present in the office of Taluka Inspector of Land Records at Paranda District Osmanabad, however, the fact remains that, the applicant has to attend her five years minor child at Beed, ::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 18:59:19 ::: 12 mca24.12

therefore, it may be difficult and inconvenient for the applicant to attend the proceedings being rt

Hindu Marriage Petition No. 56 of 2012. It is not ou

in dispute that, the respondent-husband is attending the pending proceedings before the C

competent Court at Beed, instituted by the wife. Therefore, already the respondent-husband is attending the proceedings at Beed. The contention h

of the respondent-husband that, there is threat to ig

his life and he was beaten by the father and H

relatives of the applicant is concerned, if such incident happens in future, he will be at liberty y

to file appropriate application before the ba

concerned Court. The incidence of assault or threat to the respondent-husband which is stated om

in the affidavit in reply, is not at Beed. It is the case of the respondent-husband that, he is assaulted or threatened by the relatives of the B

applicant at Paithan and Shevgaon. Therefore, in my opinion, for the reasons aforesaid, Misc. Civil Application deserves to be allowed, same is allowed.

::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 18:59:19 ::: 13 mca24.12

8. Hindu Marriage Petition No. 56 of 2012 rt

pending before Court of the 5th Joint Civil Judge, ou

Senior Division, Ahmednagar shall stand transferred to the Court of the Civil Judge, C

Senior Division, Beed. The concerned Court is directed to forward entire proceedings in respect of Hindu Marriage Petition No. 56 of 2012 to the h

Court of the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Beed, ig

within one week from receipt of copy of this H

order. The applicant or her relatives will produce the copy of this order to the concerned Court at y

Ahmednagar.

ba

9. Rule made absolute on above terms. Misc. om

Civil Application stands disposed of. sd/-

[S.S. SHINDE, J.]

sut/AUG12

B

::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 18:59:19 :::