MCA/1195/2008 1/3 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD MISC.CIVIL APPLICATION - FOR TRANSFER No. 1195 of 2008 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH ========================================= = 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 ? ========================================= = SAPNA HARSHADBHAI PARMAR - Applicant(s) Versus JAYDIP SHANKERBHAI RATHOD & 1 - Opponent(s) ========================================= = Appearance : MR ASHISH D OZA for Applicant(s) : 1, SERVED BY AFFIX.(N) for Opponent(s) : 1, NOTICE SERVED for Opponent(s) : 2, ========================================= = CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH Date : 10/07/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. The present application is filed by the applicant-wife MCA/1195/2008 2/3 JUDGMENT under Section 24 of the Civil Procedure Code to transfer Civil Case No. 760/2007, pending in the Court of learned Family Court, to the Court of Bhavnagar. 2. It is the contention on behalf of the applicant that the applicant is the wife and is residing at Bhavnagar and other proceedings are pending at Bhavnagar. It is submitted that the applicant is a lady and there is no one in the family, who resides at Ahmedabad. Because of the pending proceedings, the applicant, on each and every occasion, alone has to travel to Ahmedabad and even financially also it is not possible for the applicant to meet with the expenses. Therefore, it is requested to transfer the proceedings from the Family Court, Ahmedabad to the Bhavnagar Court. 3. Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant has heavily relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of SUMITA SINGH Vs KUMAR SANJAY reported in AIR 2002 SC 396. It is submitted that as observed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, it is the convenience of the wife that must be looked at. 4. Though served, nobody appears for the opponents. 5. From the averments made in the application, it appears that the applicant-wife is residing at Bhavnagar and Civil Case No. 760/2007 filed by the opponent-husband is at Family Court, Ahmedabad. It is averred in the application that there is no one in the family who resides at Ahmedabad. On each and every occasion, she has to go to Ahmedabad alone and even financially also it is not possible for the applicant to meet with MCA/1195/2008 3/3 JUDGMENT the expenses for traveling to Ahmedabad. Identical question came to be considered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of SUMITA SINGH Vs KUMAR SANJAY (supra). Considering Section 24 of the Civil Procedure Code, in the matrimonial proceedings, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed that it is the convenience of the wife that must be looked at. 6. Considering the averments made in the application, as stated hereinabove, the present Miscellaneous Civil Application is required to be allowed. Civil Case No. 760/2007, pending with the Family Court, Ahmedabad is hereby ordered to be transferred to the District Court, Bhavnagar and the District Court, Bhavnagar will transfer the said case to the appropriate Court under its jurisdiction. With this, the present Miscellaneous Civil Application is allowed. Rule made absolute accordingly. (M.R. SHAH, J.) siji