SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Smt. Debdutta Das Datta vs Sri Biswajit Datta on 16 January, 2020

1

16.01.2020

suman 20
Ct.17
C.O. 3942 of 2019

Smt. Debdutta Das Datta
Vs.

Sri Biswajit Datta

Mr. K. D. Podder
Mr. Pradip Paul
…for the petitioner

Mr. Jayanta Narayan Chatterjee
Ms. Paramita Mukherjee
Ms. Moumita Pandit
Mr. S. Naskar
Ms. Jayashree Patra
…for the opposite party

Matrimonial Suit No.2346 of 2019 praying for

dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce is sought to be

transferred from the Court of the learned 15th Additional

District Judge at Alipore, South 24 Parganas to the Court of

the learned District Judge, Paschim Medinipur at Midnapore.

The ground mentioned in the application under Section 24 of

the Code of Civil Procedure is that the petitioner has filed an

application under various provisions of the Protection of

Women from Domestic Violence Act before the learned

Magistrate at Paschim Medinipur. In the said proceeding a

paltry sum of Rs.5,000/- was granted as ad-interim
2

maintenance in favour of the petitioner. The petitioner has

been residing within the jurisdiction of Paschim Medinipur

District Judge and it is not possible for her financially to

attend and contest the matrimonial suit at Alipore coming

from Paschim Medinipur. So, the petitioner has prayed for

transferring the said suit at Paschim Medinipur. It is

submitted by Mr. Podder, learned advocate for the petitioner

that in the case of Tejalben versus Mihirbhai Bharalbhai

Kothari reported in 2016 (3) SCC 69 it is held by the

Hon’ble Supreme Court that when other proceedings

between the parties are pending at Jamnagar, Gujarat, for all

practical purposes matrimonial suit should also be

transferred to Jamnagar. Relying on the said decision it is

submitted by Mr. Podder that since the proceeding under the

Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act is pending

at Paschim Medinipur, the matrimonial suit should also be

transferred to Paschim Medinipur.

Per contra, Mr. Jayanta Narayan Chatterjee, learned

advocate for the opposite party submits that the opposite

party previously filed a suit for judicial separation. As a

matter of retaliation the petitioner made a complaint under

Section 498A I.P.C. against the opposite party, his parents
3

and sister. At the time of submission of charge sheet, the

sister of the opposite party was discharged. The petitioner

filed a ‘naraji’ petition against such order of discharge of the

opposite party. Thus, the petitioner is hotly contesting the

case under Section 498A I.P.C. against the opposite party

and her other matrimonial relations at Alipore. Therefore,

there is no reason to transfer the matrimonial suit from

Alipore to Paschim Medinipur.

It is also submitted by Mr. Chatterjee that if the Court

at all thinks that the said matrimonial suit ought to be

transferred from Alipore to some other Court, relative

convenience and inconvenience of both the parties should be

looked into. The opposite party is residing at Behala and he

is working in an office situated at Sector -V of Salt Lake City.

The opposite party will also face similar inconvenience if his

case is transferred to Paschim Medinipur. It is suggested by

Mr. Chatterjee that the said matrimonial suit should be

transferred either to Tamluk or to Howrah or to some other

Court in between Alipore and Paschim Medinipur for trial and

disposal. It is also proposed by him that in such case the

opposite party is agreeable to bear the conveyance charges

for the petitioner.

4

The learned advocate for the petitioner, in turn, has

raised vehement objection against such proposal. According

to him, the petitioner does not require to appear daily in the

proceeding under Section 498A I.P.C. On the contrary, she

will have to appear before the Court on each and every

occasion to contest the said matrimonial suit. Considering

such aspect of the matter, the suit should be transferred to

the Court of the learned District Judge, Paschim Medinipur.

Having heard the submission made by the learned

advocate for the parties and on perusal of the entire

materials on record it is ascertained that the petitioner did

not make any averment about pendency of a case under

Section 498A I.P.C. at Alipore in her application under

Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure. It is needless to

say that if a person comes up before the Court seeking some

equitable relief, he /she must come with clean hand. The

fact of pendency of the case under Section 498A I.P.C. at

Alipore is suppressed by the petitioner.

Be that as it may, when the learned advocate for the

opposite party submits that the opposite party is agreeable

to bear the cost of conveyance of the petitioner, I am of the

view, taking into consideration the relative convenience and
5

inconvenience of both the parties, that the matrimonial suit

should be transferred to the Court of the learned District

Judge, Purba Medinipur at Tamluk. In that event, there will

not be much inconvenience of both the parties to represent

and contest the suit.

The opposite party is directed to bear the cost of

conveyance to the petitioner and another person who may

accompany her to Tamluk Court on each and every date of

her appearance before the Court to contest the said suit.

The cost of conveyance is assessed at Rs.500/- per day.

Accordingly, the instant application under Section 24 of the

Code of Civil Procedure is disposed of transferring the

Matrimonial Suit No.2346 of 2019 from the Court of 15th

Additional District Judge at Alipore to the Court of the

learned District Judge at Tamluk, Purba Medinipur.

Let a copy of this order be sent to the learned

Additional District Judge, 15th Court and learned District

Judge at Tamluk, Purba Medinipur through the department

for compliance.

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied

for, be given to the learned advocates for the parties on

usual undertakings.

6

(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