HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Transfer Appl. No. 28 / 2017
Smt. Monika W/o Shri Deepak Karamchandani D/o Shri Ishwar Lal
Sevani, Aged About 31 Years, By Caste – Sindhi, Resident of –
Presently Living At House No.-A-148, Jawahar Nagar, Jaipur (Raj.)
—-Petitioner
Versus
Deepak Karamchanani S/o Shri Jagdish Karamchandani, Aged
About 31 Years, By Caste – Sindhi, Resident of – 2-F-1, Chopasani
Housing Board, Jodhpur (Raj.).
—-Respondent
__
For Petitioner(s) : Mr Manoj Kashyap
For Respondent(s) : Mr Dilip Singh Baghela
__
HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VIRENDRA KUMAR MATHUR
Judgment
16/11/2017
This Transfer Application under sec.24 CPC has been filed for
transfer of application No.421/2016 {Deepak Karamchandani v.
Manika} filed by the respondent under sec.13 of the Hindu
Marriage Act, pending before the Family Court No.1, Jodhpur
Metropolitan to Family Court, Jaipur.
Briefly stated, the respondent filed an application under
sec.13 of the Hindu Marriage Act for dissolution of marriage dated
30.07.2012 solemnized between the parties. It was contended
that the respondent and his family members have tortured and
humiliated the petitioner for their unlawful demand of dowry and
threatened the petitioner to face consequences if their demand is
not fulfilled. On this the petitioner lodged an FIR No.111/2016 at
Women Police Station, Jaipur East on 02.09.2016. After
(2 of 4)
[CTA-28/2017]
investigation in the matter, the Police filed challan on 09.01.2017
against respondent before Additional Civil Judge Metropolitan
Magistrate No.15, Jaipur Metropolitan under secs.498A, 406 IPC.
It was also averred that from the wedlock, a baby girl “Dolly
Karamchandani” was born on 11.07.2013 and from date of her
birth she is living with the mother and now she is at tender age of
3 years 6 months. It was also submitted that the petitioner and
her minor daughter are completely dependent on petitioner’s
father, she has no source of income and the distance between
Jaipur to Jodhpur is more than 300 kms which is quite far away. It
is very inconvenient for the petitioner to travel all alone with her
minor girl child to a distance of more than 300 kms. It was further
submitted that the petitioner filed S.B. Civil Transfer Application
No.153/2016 before Jaipur Bench of this Court and the Court vide
order dated 18.01.2017 dismissed the petition with liberty to file
fresh Transfer Petition before the Principal Seat at Jodhpur.
Notices were issued to respondent. The respondent after
putting his appearance has filed reply to the application and
denied the facts as to harassment humiliation to petitioner and
the demand of dowry. It was further submitted that it is wrong to
contend that petitioner and her daughter are completely
dependent on petitioner’s father and there is no source of income.
It was contended that the petitioner is a woman from sound family
and having earning members in her house at Jaipur. It was also
averred that the respondent is ready to pay her travelling and
other expenses to Jodhpur.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
(3 of 4)
[CTA-28/2017]
After the marriage between parties, out of the wedlock a girl
child was born on 11.07.2013, who is presently 3 years 6 months
of age. On account of mental torture and humiliation for unlawful
demand of dowry, the petitioner lodged an FIR No.111/2016 at
Women Police Station, Jaipur East on 02.09.2016, in which after
investigation Police has filed challan on 09.01.2017 before learned
Additional Civil Judge Metropolitan Magistrate No.15, Jaipur
Metropolitan against the respondent under secs.498A, 406 IPC.
Copies of the FIR and challan have been placed on record as
Annx.2. The respondent has filed divorce petition before the
Family Court, Jodhpur. The respondent has to appear before
Additional Civil Judge Metropolitan Magistrate No.15, Jaipur
Metropolitan for contesting the case registered against him under
secs.498A, 406 IPC.
It is very difficult for a lady to travel all alone from Jaipur to
Jodhpur with minor daughter of 3 years 6 months age. Although
the respondent has submitted that he is ready to pay travelling
expenses, only paying travelling expenses can not compensate
against inconvenience to the petitioner in travelling all alone from
Jaipur to Jodhpur with very young daughter.
Looking to the facts circumstances of the case, when the
respondent is already appearing at Jaipur for contesting the case
pending against him under secs.498A, 406 IPC before ACJMM
No.15, Jaipur Metropolitan, in these circumstances, in the opinion
of the Court convenience of the petitioner has to be considered in
view of ratio of the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in
Vaishali Shridhar Jagtap v. Shridhar Vishwanath Jagtap
(4 of 4)
[CTA-28/2017]
reported in 2016 (4) WLN 237 (SC) and it is a fit case to be
transferred.
Accordingly, this Transfer Application is allowed and the
application No.421/2016 {Deepak Karamchandani v. Manika},
filed by the respondent under sec.13 of the Hindu Marriage Act,
pending before the Family Court No.1, Jodhpur Metropolitan is
ordered to be transferred to the Family Court at Jaipur.
(DR. VIRENDRA KUMAR MATHUR), J.
mma/34
