SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Nilufa Yeasmin vs Md. Sujauddin on 13 June, 2019

1

13.06.2019
07.
as

C.O.174 of 2019
Nilufa Yeasmin
Vs.
Md. Sujauddin

Mr. Proshenjit Mookherjee.

…for the Petitioner.

Mr. M. Maity,
Mr. Prabir Rej.
…for the Respondent.

This is an application under Section 24 of the Code of Civil

Procedure (hereafter the CPC) filed by the wife/petitioner praying

for transfer of Matrimonial Suit No.22 of 2018 which was filed by

the husband/opposite party in the 6th Court of the learned Civil

Judge (Junior Division) at Alipore to the Court of the learned Civil

Judge (Junior Division) at Rampurhat in the district of Birbhum.

It appears from the application that the marriage of the

petitioner and the opposite party/husband was performed on 16th

December, 2016 according to the Mohammedan rites and

ceremonies. Soon after her marriage, the petitioner was subjected

to physical and mental torture which prompted her to take shelter

at her paternal home after eight (8) months of marriage sometimes

in August, 2017. It is also alleged by the petitioner that the

opposite party/husband is having illicit relation with another lady

during the subsistence of the said marriage. In the wedlock
2

between the petitioner and the opposite party/husband, she gave

birth to a male child on 25th May, 2018. It is further contended by

the petitioner that she has no source of income. It appears that

she is fully dependent upon her parents. She is also pursuing her

teachers’ training course at Rampurhat. Distance between

Rampurhat and Alipore is about 300 kilometers. The petitioner will

suffer tremendous financial hardship if she is compelled to come

to Alipore Court to contest the Matrimonial Suit No.22 of 2018

which has been filed by the opposite party/husband for restitution

of their conjugal rites. It is also submitted by the petitioner that

she filed a petition under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure against the opposite party/husband claiming

maintenance for herself and her minor daughter. The criminal

case under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code along with other

penal provisions is also pending before the Court of the Learned

Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rampurhat. Therefore, the

petitioner has prayed for transferring Matrimonial Suit No.22 of

2018 to a Court of competent jurisdiction at Rampurhat.

Mr. Maity, learned Advocate for the opposite party/husband

at the outset submits that the opposite party/husband has filed a

Matrimonial Suit No.22 of 2018 for restitution of conjugal rites. If

the petitioner wants to lead normal and happy conjugal life with

the opposite party/husband, the latter will withdraw the suit. If on
3

the contrary, the petitioner does not want to lead normal marital

relation with the opposite party/husband, in such case also the

opposite party/husband will withdraw the suit for restitution of

conjugal rites because under such circumstances, the opposite

party/husband will not get any relief in proceeding with the said

suit.

Under instruction, learned Advocate for the petitioner

submits that the petitioner was subjected to tremendous physical

and mental torture by the opposite party/husband and other

matrimonial relations at her matrimonial home. She was driven

out from her matrimonial home within one year of marriage.

Moreover, the nature of allegation that has been levelled against

the opposite party/husband suggests that the petitioner would not

be in a position to reunite and lead normal marital relation with

the opposite party/husband.

In view of such circumstances and giving due honour of the

submissions made by the learned Advocate for the opposite

party/husband, the opposite party/husband will have no other

alternative but to withdraw the Matrimonial Suit No.22 of 2018.

On instruction, Mr. Maity also submits that the opposite

party/husband will withdraw the said suit at the earliest

opportunity.

4

In view of such circumstances, I am of the view that no

purpose will be sub-served by transferring Matrimonial Suit No.22

of 2018. Therefore, the prayer of the petitioner for transferring the

said suit is refused and the instant revision under Section 24 of

the CPC is disposed of contest on the basis of the above

observations.

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for,

shall be given to the parties, as expeditiously as possible on

compliance of all necessary formalities.

( Bibek Chaudhuri, J.)

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2020 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation