SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Smt. Mamta Mishra vs Principal Judge Family Court … on 29 January, 2020


?Court No. – 19

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 24/ORDER 39 RULE 2-A CPC No. – 107 of 2018

Applicant :- Smt. Mamta Mishra

Opposite Party :- Principal Judge Family Court Bahraich And Another

Counsel for Applicant :- Alok Srivastava

Counsel for Opposite Party :- Pawan Kumar Mishra

Hon’ble Rajan Roy,J.


The applicant herein seeks transfer of proceedings under Section 7, 10 and 20 of Guardian and Wards Act which is pending before the Family Court at Bahraich to Gonda where she is residing with her minor son.

The contention of the learned counsel for the applicant is that she is not receiving any maintenance and does not have her own source of livelihood. She is dependent solely upon her parents. She is unable to do pairavi of the case pending at Bahraich on account of distance of 50 kilometers between the two cities and also on account of the fact that she is a lady having a minor son and has to look after the needs of the son. Furthermore, it is emphatically contended that whenever she visits the Court at Bahraich to pursue her case she is being pressurized to enter into a compromise and is being threatened, therefore, she feels unsafe and this is adversely affecting her in pursuing her cases against the opposite party. It is also contended that as far as criminal case pending at Bahraich is concerned, an application for its transfer is also proposed to be filed shortly.

Learned counsel for the opposite party opposed the application on the ground that a criminal case is already going on at Bahraich and the applicant has also engaged a lawyer on her behalf in the said case but has not moved any application for its transfer, however, on being confronted with the fact that the applicant is a lady who does not have any means of livelihood and is not even being paid maintenance by the opposite party as also the fact that she has a minor son the learned counsel for the opposite party could not satisfy the Court as to why the proceedings should not be transferred to Gonda except for saying that the opposite party himself does not earn much.

Be that as it may, the opposite party is a male and better placed than the applicant who has to look after her minor son also and does not have any means of livelihood, therefore, in view of the aforesaid circumstances and reasons, it is ordered that Case No. 36/70/14; Narendra Kumar Mishra Vs. Smt. Mamta pending before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Bahraich shall be transferred to the competent Family Court at Gonda.

Requisite steps in this regard shall be taken by the concerned.

It is further made clear that the proceedings which have already taken at Bahraich shall form part of the records, meaning thereby, now the Court at Gonda shall proceed from the stage already reached by the Court at Bahraich and there shall be no de novo proceedings.

The application is allowed to the aforesaid terms.

Order Date :- 29.1.2020




Leave a Reply

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

Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link
MyNation Times Magzine

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.


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