HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
S.B. Civil Transfer Appl. No. 36 / 2017
Karishma Kanwar W/o Pradhuman Singh D/o Madan Singh
Chauhan, Aged About 28 Years, By Caste Rajput, R/o Shiv Colony,
New Sanganer Road, Sodala, Jaipur, Tehsil and District Jaipur
Pradhuman Singh S/o Kalyan Singh, Aged About 31 Years, By
Caste Rajput, R/o Hanuman Hattha Nagar, Opposite Parishad
Bikaner (Address Mentioned in Divorce Petition R/o Housing Board
Colony, Hanumangarh Junction, Tehsil and District Hanumangarh
For Petitioner(s) : Mr R.S. Choudhary
For Respondent(s) : None present
HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VIRENDRA KUMAR MATHUR
This Transfer Application under sec.24 CPC has been filed for
transfer of Divorce Petition No.219/2016 filed by the respondent
before Family Court, Hanumangarh to the Family Court at Jaipur.
Briefly stated, the marriage of the parties was solemnized on
04.02.2010. At the time of marriage, the applicant was residing at
Jaipur while the respondents was residing at Bikaner. Their
marriage was registered at Biikaner. After one year of the
marriage, the applicant was subjected to physical and mental
cruelty for dowry, by the respondent and his family members.
After the marriage, in or around October 2011 the applicant
became pregnant. When this fact came to knowledge of her
mother-in-law, she got done her sonography privately and when
the fact of baby girl came to their knowledge, members of
(2 of 3)
respondent’s family subjected her to even more physical and
Thereafter, the respondent filed an application under sec.9 of
the Hindu Marriage Act at Hanumangarh. Subsequently, the
respondent tendered apology and took the applicant with him but
attitude of the respondent and his family did not change. She was
thrown out of her matrimonial home by the respondent in July
2014. Presently, the applicant is residing with her parents at
Jaipur while the respondent resides at Bikaner.
Notwithstanding this fact, just to harass and humiliate the
applicant, the respondent has filed a Divorce Petition before the
Family Court, Hanumangarh on 25.04.2016 whereas no cause of
action had arisen at Hanumangarh.
The applicant has lodged an FIR No.192/2016 against the
respondent under sec.498A, 406 and 120B IPC, which was
registered with Mahila Police Station, Jaipur (South) on
28.12.2016. She has also filed an application under sec.12 of the
Domestic Violence Act on 11.01.2017 before the ACJMM, Jaipur.
It was also contended that the applicant is a lady, having no
means of livelihood, she is residing with her parents at Jaipur and
is dependent on them. The marriage of the applicant and the
respondent took place at Jaipur but just to harass humiliate the
applicant, the respondent has filed the Divorce Petition at
Hanumangarh court. The distance between Jaipur and
Hanumangarh is about 400 kms and being a lady, it is very
inconvenient for the applicant to rush to Hanumangarh from Jaipur
for attending proceedings of divorce petition.
(3 of 3)
It is also stated that two cases are already pending against
the respondent at Jaipur, criminal case under FIR 192/2016 and
the application filed under Domestic Violence Act, which is pending
before ACJMM No.9, Jaipur Metropolitan.
Despite service, nobody appeared for the respondent.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant.
The marriage between the parties was solemnized at Jaipur.
It is true that the applicant lodged an FIR No.192/2016 against
the respondent for offence under secs.498A, 406 120B IPC,
which was registered with Mahila Police Station (South), Jaipur on
25.04.2016 and an application was also filed under the Domestic
Violence Act, which is pending in the court of Metropolitan
Magistrate No.9 at Jaipur. The applicant lady is presently residing
at Jaipur with her parents and is having no means of livelihood
and she is fully dependent on her parents.
The divorce petition has been filed by the respondent at
Hanumangarh, where no party, neither the applicant nor
respondent, reside. Considering the hardship of the applicant lady,
in view of ratio laid down by 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
Divorce Petition No.219/2016 (Pradhuman Singh v. Smt Karishma
Kanwar) pending before the Family Court, Hanumangarh is
ordered to be transferred to the Family Court at Jaipur.
(DR. VIRENDRA KUMAR MATHUR), J.