SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Ruma Kundu vs Sajal Kundu on 14 May, 2018


Sl. no.93
Ct. No. 6

C.O. 4761 of 2016

Ruma Kundu

Sajal Kundu

Mr. Shibaji Kumar Das
…. for the petitioner.

Despite service, none appears to contest the application under Section 24

of the Code of Civil Procedure.

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

the instance of the wife praying for transfer of Mat Suit No. 45 of 2016

(previously numbered as Mat Suit 519 of 2016). It is the case of the petitioner

that under compulsion, the petitioner has been presently residing at Baranagar

with her brother. The petitioner has no source of income and therefore she has

been in great financial constraint. With this financial constraint, it is difficult for

her to travel to Burdwan to attend the proceedings of the matrimonial suit which

has been instituted by the husband. The petitioner has stated that from

Baranagar to the court of Burdwan, she has to travel at least 130 k.m. in one

way and because of her financial stringency, it is not possible for her to look after

the case and, ultimately, if that is going to happen, she will be seriously

prejudiced. That apart, it has been further stated that there are two other

proceedings – one under Section 498A/323/34 of the Indian Penal Code and the

other one is a proceeding under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure

pending at Barrackpore court. Both the said two proceedings are being contested

by the husband at Barrackpore. The petitioner has made an averment that her

husband is an employee of a Bank. He is presently working for gain as a Manager

in Deutsche Bank having its office at Shakespeare Sarani, Kolkata and earns

handsome salary.

Having considered the averments made in the petition and the materials

disclosed by the petitioner in the application under Section 24 of the Code of Civil

Procedure and having considered the convenience and inconvenience of the

parties, this court is of the view that it will be of great inconvenience for the wife

to attend the matrimonial suit in the court of the learned District Judge,


It is a settled law that inconvenience of the wife is of paramount

consideration for disposal of an application under Section 24 of the Code of Civil

Procedure. Such principle has already been decided by this court earlier in a

decision in the case of Pampa Banerjee Vs. Shri Mridul Banerjee, reported in

2017(1) WBLR (Cal) 30.

In view of the above, I am of the firm opinion that the present matrimonial

suit should be transferred in a place which will be convenient for the wife to


Accordingly, I direct that Mat Suit No. 45 of 2016 ( previously numbered as

Mat Suit 519 of 2016) be withdrawn from the court of the learned Additional

District Sessions Judge, 4th Court, Burdwan and be placed before the learned

Additional District Judge, Barrackpore, 24-Parganas (North) within whose

territorial jurisdiction the petitioner resides at present.

The application being C.O.4761 of 2016 is, thus, disposed of.

( Sahidullah Munshi, J)

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2021 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