HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Transfer Appl. No. 108 / 2017
Chandrakala @ Priti W/o Vikash Kumar D/o Shri Ram Kishor, R/o
Kailash Nagar, Ward No. 39, Sikar. WIFE:
—-Petitioner
Versus
Vikash Kumar S/o Ramesh Kumar, By Caste Prajapat, R/o Ward
No.4, Aathuna Mohalla, Near Lohiya Kuna, Distt. Churu. HUSBAND
—-Respondent
__
For Petitioner(s) : Mr Ajeet Singh Shekhawat
For Respondent(s) : None present
__
HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VIRENDRA KUMAR MATHUR
Judgment
30/08/2017

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

transfer of Civil Misc. Case No.386/2014 (Vikash Kumar v.

Chandra Kala), pending before the Family Court, Churu under

sec.9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, to Family Court, Sikar.

Briefly stated, marriage between the parties was solemnized

on 02.02.2012. Out of the said wedlock, a female child was born

on 28.09.2013. Soon after the marriage, behaviour of respondent-

husband and his family members changed and they started

harassing and abusing the petitioner, for extraneous reasons

including demand of dowry. Physical and mental threats were also

given on several occasions. The petitioner tried her level best to

settle down the things but of no avail as there was unwarranted

and undue pressure by the respondent and his family members for

demand of dowry.
(2 of 3)
[CTA-108/2017]

The petitioner was beaten at Churu by the respondent-

husband and his family members for demand of dowry, therefore,

she had no option but to remain at Sikar, as their demand was

unrealistic and father of the petitioner was not in a position to

fulfill such demand. The petitioner under these circumstances filed

a complaint under secs.498A, 406, 323, 120B IPC and sec.3 of the

Dowry Prohibition Act before the Judicial Magistrate No.1, Sikar.

The matter is presently pending before the learned Judicial

Magistrate No.1, Sikar.

In counter blast, the respondent filed a petition under sec.9

of the Hindu Marriage Act before the Family Court, Churu. The

petitioner is being threatened continuously by the respondent-

husband and in such circumstances, it is not possible for her to

travel from Sikar to Churu on each and every date before the

learned Family Judge, Churu along with her small child.

Petitioner’s father is suffering from heart disease and it is not

possible for her father to accompany her to travel on each every

date for contesting the case at Churu. There is no one else in the

family to accompany the petitioner. On these counts, transfer of

the case filed by respondent at Churu was sought to Sikar.

Notices were issued to the respondent but in spite of due

service, no one appeared on behalf of the respondent.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

The petitioner is presently living with her father along with

her child. She was compelled to leave her matrimonial house by

the respondent and his family members on account of demand of

dowry and ill-treatment. The petitioner has filed a complaint under
(3 of 3)
[CTA-108/2017]

secs.498A, 406, 323, 120B IPC and sec.3 of the Dowry Prohibition

Act and the case is pending before the Judicial Magistrate No.1,

Sikar. In counter-blast, proceedings were initiated by the

respondent against the petitioner under sec.9 of the Hindu

Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal rights, before Family Court,

Churu. It was contended by the petitioner that her father is

suffering from heart disease. She has no independent source of

income and it is very difficult in these circumstances for her to

contest the petition filed by the respondent before Family Judge,

Churu. There is no one to accompany her and it is very

inconvenient for her to travel all alone with her small female child,

from Sikar to Churu.

In the facts and circumstances of the case, the

inconvenience of the applicant lady is to be looked into in view of

ratio of the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Vaishali

Shridhar Jagtap v. 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.386/2014 (Vikash Kumar v. Chandra Kala), filed by

the respondent for restitution of conjugal rights under sec.9 of the

Hindu Marriage Act, pending before the Family Court, Churu is

ordered to be transferred to the Family Court, Sikar.

(DR. VIRENDRA KUMAR MATHUR), J.

mma/27