MISC. TRANSFER PETITION NO.22/09-Smt. Manisha Jain @ Neeta Jain Vs. Rajesh Kumar. Judgment dt.6.10.09 1/4 S.B. CIVIL MISC. TRANSFER PETITION NO.22/2009 Smt. Manisha Jain @ Neeta Jain Vs. Rajesh Kumar. Date of order : 6th October, 2009 PRESENT HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI Mr. Nikhil Dungawat for Dr. P.S. Bhati for the petitioner. Mr. Kalpit Jain for Mr. Manish Pitaliya for the respondent. ------- 1. The petitioner wife is not present in Court despite directions of more than one occasions passed earlier. It appears that the petitioner is avoiding the appearance in the Court with children despite directions of this Court. Therefore, the arguments on merits of Transfer Application was heard. 2. By this transfer petition, the petitioner-wife Smt. Manisha Jain @ Neeta Jain has sought transfer of case No.74/2008 – Rajesh Kumar Vs. Smt. Manisha Jain @ Neeta Jain pending in the Family Court, Udaipur filed under Section 6 and 7 of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 seeking custody of two children out of the wedlock namely Tripal and Aditya. MISC. TRANSFER PETITION NO.22/09-Smt. Manisha Jain @ Neeta Jain Vs. Rajesh Kumar. Judgment dt.6.10.09 2/4 3. The question of jurisdiction upon an application filed by the petitioner-wife on 16.2.2008 has been decided against her by the Family Court, Udaipur by the order dated 18.5.2009 finding therein that these children were ordinarily residing with the respondent-father Shri Rajesh Kumar at Bhinder, the place of service of the respondent- husband and on 22.1.2008 without the knowledge and consent of the respondent-husband, the petitioner-wife took away these children and since then they are residing with her at Banswara. 4. In the present transfer petition filed by the petitioner- wife, the petitioner has sought transfer of the same case No.74/2008 from the Family Court, Udaipur to the Family Court, Banswara, without challenging the order dated 18.5.2009 passed by the learned Family Court, Udiapur. 5. The Family Court, Udaipur in its order dated 18.5.2009 has found that since these children were living with respondent- husband before being illegally taken away without his consent and knowledge from Bhinder to Banswara by the petitioner-wife, the MISC. TRANSFER PETITION NO.22/09-Smt. Manisha Jain @ Neeta Jain Vs. Rajesh Kumar. Judgment dt.6.10.09 3/4 place Banswara does not become the ordinary place of residence of these children and Section 9 of the said Act in such cases would not be attracted and, therefore, the question of jurisdiction raised before the Family Court, Udaipur was decided against the petitioner-wife. 6. The petitioner-wife has approached this Court without challenging the said order seeking transfer of the said case from Udaipur to Banswara narrating her circumstances that she being lady living with her father at Banswara with these children, it would be inconvenient for her to attend these proceedings at Udaipur. It may be observed here that mere inconvenience of petitioner-wife is not a ground to transfer the proceedings from one place to another. It has to be coupled with so many other circumstances before the decision to transfer such cases is taken. 7. In the present case as observed above, the petitioner cannot avoid the directions of this Court by not appearing in this Court as the Court wanted to explore the possibilities of compromise between the parties looking for the benefit of petitioner's children but MISC. TRANSFER PETITION NO.22/09-Smt. Manisha Jain @ Neeta Jain Vs. Rajesh Kumar. Judgment dt.6.10.09 4/4 she also appears to have filed this transfer application without challenging the order dated 18.5.2009 passed by the Family Court, Udaipur. This device of the petitioner-wife cannot succeed and must fail. 8. Consequently, this transfer petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. [ DR. VINEET KOTHARI ], J. item No.8 babulal/