WWX Wm rn u MW \ W 1 HIGH COURT OF CHH&T?I$GARH AT EIIASPUR Transfer Petition (C) N0. 10/2009 Prasmlt R / o C/ o. Shri Onkar Dubey, House No. E.W.S. 15 1. , Maharana Pratap Nagar, KOI‘ba CG SB:- Hon. Shri N.K. Agaxwal, J. PRESENT :— Ku. Sofla Khan, Adv. for the appellant. Shri Varun Shanna, Adv. for thé respondent. ORAL ORDER (22—3—2010) 9w WK. Agarwal, J 1. H€ard fmaily. '2. The instant pem’ion is directed under Section ‘24 of the Code of Civi1 Procedure, for transfer of cage pending before the Family Curt, Korba bearing case No. 2 1-A/ 2009. 3. Facts of the cage in brief are that. the respondent has filed an application under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for divorce against the petitioner herein, which is pending consideration before the Family Court, Korba. in the said caSe, on an application preferred by the petitioner, learned Family Court granted Rs. 340/ ~ per hearing for two persons as litigation expenses vide order dated 12—10—2009 The said order shows that the petitioner is a working woman earning Rs. 11,500/— per month. Vide transfer petition, the petitioner wants transfer of the case to Fainiiy Court, Bilaspur on the ground that she is a heart patient; the expanse awarded by the Family Court is on lower side; in the Family Court, Korba, there is no toilet facility for ladies and SO 011i . PETITIGNER Smt. Rashmi Sharma, agad about (wife). 82 y€ar$, W/o. Shri Pradcaep ”Kumar Shanna, R/o Ashok Nagar, Sa‘x‘kanda, Bilaspur (CG) Vemus RESPGNDENT Shri Pradeep Kumar Smarma, aged {Husband} about 35 waw $70 Shx‘i Ka'shi Prasad Shéu‘ga: R/o vi11{:1g€ Saragaon, DiStt. Jalljgir-Champa cam from Korba to Bilasur. C)! v? 2 -. Learned counsel for the petitioner s Dmits that there are valid grounds avaihble to the petitianer for transfer of her . On the other gognd, Shri Varan Shanna, learned counsel for the respondent WOuld contend that after getting litigation €xpenses, now this transfer petition has been made on filthy grounds. Korba is at a distance of 100 km. from Bilaspur which is not much, the petitioner i3 a working woman regularly attending her place of work at Seepat and, therefore, it cemnot be said that due to her illness, she cannot move here and there. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the impugned order, in the light of the facts mentioned hereinabove, I do not find any substance in the transfer petition. The same tiesewes to be and is hereby dismissed. 7. No order as to costs. Sjii” I NK. Agurwz“ Judge