DEBASMITA DASH vs SOUMYA RANJAN PANI

Court
Odisha High Court

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK
TRP(C) No.104 of 2026

CNR No.ODHC010257902026

Debasmita Dash ….... Petitioner

-Versus-
Soumya Ranjan Pani ....... Opposite Party


Advocate for the parties

For Petitioner : Mr. Debidutta Mohapatra,
Advocate

For Opposite Party : None



...................

CORAM: JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA

Date of Hearing & Judgment: 31.08.2026
_____________________________________________________________
S.K. MISHRA, J.
1. Pursuant to order dated 17.04.2026 though notice was
issued to Opposite Party by Speed Post with A.D. and office note
indicates that service of notice is sufficient, the Opposite Party
goes unrepresented when the matter is called. That apart, it is
revealed from the transfer petition that a prayer has been made to
transfer the matrimonial proceeding from the Court of Family
Page 1 of 8

Court-II, Bhubaneswar to the Court of Family Court-I,
Bhubaneswar, which are located in the Judicial Complex,
Bhubaneswar. Hence, on being prayed by the learned Counsel for
the Petitioner, the transfer petition is taken up for hearing and
disposal at the stage of admission in absence of the Opposite
Party.
2. This Transfer Petition has been filed by the Petitioner-
wife, who is the Opposite Party in C.P. No.1136 of 2024, for
transfer of the said proceeding from the Court of learned Judge,
Family Court-II, Bhubaneswar to the Court of learned Judge,
Family Court-I, Bhubaneswar. That apart, a further prayer has
been made in the transfer petition for analogous hearing of C.P.
No.391 of 2025, which is pending at the instance of the Petitioner
before the learned Judge, Family Court-I, Bhubaneswar along with
C.P. No.1136 of 2024.
3. Heard Mr. Mohapatra, learned Counsel for the
Petitioner.
4. To substantiate the prayer made in the transfer
petition, reiterating the grounds urged therein, learned Counsel for
the Petitioner submits, the Petitioner is a deserted lady. She has
no source of income and totally dependent on her parents and at
present staying with them at her parental home. That apart, at her
Page 2 of 8

instance, C.P. No.391 of 2025 under Section 13(1) (ia) of the Hindu
Marriage Act, 1955, with a prayer to pass a decree of divorce, is
now pending before the Family Court-I, Bhubaneswar.
5. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner further submits, the
Petitioner-wife has preferred C.P. No.391 of 2025 for divorce before
the learned Judge, Family Court-I, Bhubaneswar, whereas, the
Opposite Party-husband has preferred C.P. No.1136 of 2024 for
restitution of conjugal life before the Court of learned Judge,
Family Court-II, Bhubaneswar under Section-9 of the Act, 1955. If
both the proceedings are tried differently by different Courts, it
would lead to conflicting judgments and multiplicity in trial. That
apart, she being a destitute lady, having no source of income, it
would cause hardship to her to engage a lawyer and pay him fees
on each date in both the said proceedings. If both the matrimonial
proceedings are tagged and tried together, she would be saved
from incurring extra-legal expenditure towards the professional
fees of the lawyer, apart from running to both the said Courts
frequently to attend the day-to-day Court proceedings, as the said
cases are being posted to different dates. Accordingly, learned
Counsel for the Petitioner prays for transfer of proceeding of C.P.
No.1136 of 2024, pending in Family Court-II, Bhubaneswar, to
Page 3 of 8

Family Court-I, Bhubaneswar and for analogous hearing with C.P.
No.391 of 2025.
6. At this stage, being relevant, it would be apt to
reproduce below Section 21-A of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955:
21-A-Power to transfer petitions in certain
“
cases -(1) Where-
(a) a petition under this Act has been
presented to a district court having jurisdiction by
a party to a marriage praying for a decree for
judicial separation under section 10 or for a decree
of divorce under section 13, and
(b) another petition under this Act has been
presented thereafter by the other party to the
marriage praying for a decree of judicial
separation under section 10 or for a decree of
divorce under section 13 or any ground whether
in the same district court or in a different
district court, in the same State or in a
different State,
The petitions shall be dealt with as specified in
sub-section (2).

(2) In a case where sub-section (1) applies-
(a) if the petitions are presented to the same
district Court, both the petitions shall be tried and
heard together by that district Court;
(b) if the petitions are presented to
different District Courts, the petition
presented later shall be transferred to the
district court in which the earlier petition
was presented and both the petitions shall be
heard and disposed of together by the district
court in which the earlier petition was
presented.
Page 4 of 8

(3) In a case where clause (b) of sub-section (2)
applies, the court or the Government, as the case
may be, competent under the Code of Civil
Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908), to transfer any suit or
proceeding from the district court in which the later
petition has been presented to the district court in
which the earlier petition is pending, shall exercise
its powers to transfer such later petition as if it
had been empowered so to do under the said
Code.”
(Emphasis supplied)

7. That apart, law is well settled that, when two or more
proceedings are pending in different Courts between the same
parties, which raise common question of fact and law, and when
the decisions in the cases are interdependent, it is desirable that
they should be tried together by the same judge, so as to avoid
multiplicity in trial of the same issues and conflict of decisions.
8. At this juncture, it would be apposite to deal with the
Judgment of the Supreme Court reported in 2022 SCC OnLine SC
1199 (N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs. A.S. Saravana Karthik Sha),
wherein it is held as follows:-
“10. Further, when two or more proceedings are
pending in different Courts between the same
parties which raise common question of fact and
law, and when the decisions in the cases are
interdependent, it is desirable that they should be
tried together by the same Judge so as to avoid
multiplicity in trial of the same issues and
conflict of decisions.
”
(Emphasis supplied)
Page 5 of 8

9. Hence, after going through the pleadings and
documents on record, legal provisions extracted above, so also the
settled position of law and the observations detailed above, this
Court is inclined to allow the prayer made in the transfer petition.
10. However, as C.P No.1136 of 2024 was initiated first by
the Husband before the Family Court-II, Bhubaneswar, in view of
the provisions enshrined under Clause (b) of Sub-section (2) of
Section 21-A of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, this Court is of the
view that, instead of transferring proceeding in C.P No.1136 of
2024 to the Family Court-I, Bhubaneswar, proceeding in C.P.
No.391 of 2025 is required to be transferred to the Family Court-II,
Bhubaneswar, which would cause no inconvenience to the
Petitioner-wife, both the said Courts being situated at the same
place, i.e., Judicial Complex, Bhubaneswar.
11. Accordingly, the learned Judge, Family Court-I,
Bhubaneswar is directed to transmit the case record in C.P No.391
of 2025 to the Court of learned Judge, Family Court-II,
Bhubaneswar at the earliest, preferably within a period of one
week from the date of production of certified copy of this judgment.
12. On receiving the case record in C.P No.391 of 2025
from the Court of learned Judge, Family Court-I, Bhubaneswar,
the learned Judge, Family Court-II, Bhubaneswar shall re-register
Page 6 of 8

C.P No.391 of 2025, if so required, and shall do well to try both the
proceedings together and proceed further in accordance with law
giving due opportunity to both the parties.
13. For convenience of the parties, so also to expedite the
hearing of both the cases, the Judge, Family Court-II,
Bhubaneswar is requested to explore the facilities of Video
Conferencing available in the said Court and permit the parties to
appear before him through virtual mode following due procedure,
as prescribed under the Orissa High Court Video Conferencing for
Courts Rules, 2020, if so prayed. However, on the dates of effective
hearing, i.e., for examination and cross-examination of witnesses
and other purposes, for which their presence may be required by
the Court and if it is so ordered, the parties shall remain physically
present before the Court of Judge, Family Court-II, Bhubaneswar.
14. To avoid delay and notice, the parties are directed to
make a query themselves or through their counsel regarding the
date and purpose of posting of C.P. No.391 of 2025, and attend the
Court of the Judge, Family Court-II, Bhubaneswar.
15. Both the parties are further directed not to seek for
unnecessary adjournments and cooperate with the learned Judge,
Family Court-II, Bhubaneswar, who shall do well to conclude both
Page 7 of 8

the proceedings, i.e., C.P. No.1136 of 2024, so also C.P. No.391 of
2025, at the earliest.
16. With the said observation and direction, the transfer
petition stands disposed of.
17. Interim order(s), if any, stand(s) vacated.
18. Office is directed to communicate a copy of this order to
the Court of learned Judge, Family Court-I, Bhubaneswar so also
the learned Judge, Family Court-II, Bhubaneswar for compliance.
19. Urgent certified copy of the judgment be granted on
proper application as per rules.

…….……………………
S.K. MISHRA, J.












Orissa High Court, Cuttack.
st
Dated, 31 August, 2026/Kanhu
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: KANHU BEHERA
Designation: JUNIOR STENOGRAPHER
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack.
Date: 01-Sep-2026 18:33:40
Page 8 of 8