SCA/2438520/2006 1/3 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 24385 of 2006 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ========================================================= NAYNABEN AMBASHANKAR MEHTA - Petitioner(s) Versus BHARATKUMAR MULSHANKAR JOSHI - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MRS SANGEETA N PAHWA for Petitioner(s) : 1, RULE SERVED for Respondent(s) : 1, ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI Date : 19/09/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT This petition is filed by the wife of the present respondent. She has filed HMP No.4/99. The marriage petition was filed before the Civil Court at Bhavnagar. The marriage had been solemnized at SCA/2438520/2006 2/3 JUDGMENT Savarkundla and the couple was residing together till separation also at Savarkundla. It is not in dispute that later on due to bifurcation and re- organization of districts, Savarkundla Taluka was included in Amreli District. Thereupon, the husband moved application Ex.23 and requested that the said HMP be transferred to Civil Court at Amreli. This application was granted by the learned Trial Judge by the impugned order dated 15th September 2005. The petitioner, therefore, approached this Court and essentially prayed that her marriage petition be heard by the Civil Court at Bhavnagar where she is presently residing. 2. Learned advocate Ms.Pahwa for the petitioner submitted that the wife is residing at Bhavnagar and even as per the provisions contained in section 19(iii a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, it was open for her therefore to prefer the marriage petition at Bhavnagar court. She submitted that considering her condition, it is not possible for her to effectively pursue her marriage petition at Amreli. She, therefore, submitted that the proceedings be transferred back to the Civil Court at Bhavnagar. 3. Though served, no one appeared for the respondent. 4. Considering the above situation and in particular, the fact that even at the outset, marriage petition could have been validly instituted SCA/2438520/2006 3/3 JUDGMENT at civil court, Bhavnagar by the wife in terms of the provisions contained in section 19(iii a) of the Hindu Marriage Act and it was not necessary that the factum of the marriage having taken place at Savarkundla and couple having last resided at Savarkundla would give rise to the jurisdiction to Bhavnagar Court and also considering the other submissions made, I find that this is a case where powers under section 24 of the Civil Procedure Code should be exercised. 5. Accordingly, it is ordered that Hindu Marriage Petition No.4/99 which has been transferred to Civil Court at Amreli pursuant to order dated 15th September 2005, produced along with the present petition at Annexure A shall be transferred to the competent civil court at Bhavnagar. The petition stands disposed of. Rule is made absolute accordingly. (Akil Kureshi, J.) (vjn)