RANI BAI RAJAK vs Khilendra Kumar Rajak

1

CGHC010293212026 2026:CGHC:38456
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
TPC No. 128 of 2026
Rani Bai Rajak W/o Khilendra Kumar Aged About 27 Years R/o Village-
Gaitara, P.S. And Tahsil- Balodabazar, District- Balodabazar-Bhatapara, C.G.
Presently Residing At- House Of Father Shri Manharan Rajak, Village
Kodwabani, P.S. Lalpur, Tehsil And District Mungeli, C.G.
Digitally signed
by AJAY KUMAR
DWIVEDI
DN: cn=AJAY
KUMAR DWIVEDI,
ou=HIGH COURT,
o=HIGH COURT OF
CHHATTISGARH,
st=Chhattisgarh,
c=IN
Date: 2026.09.01
10:25:17 +0530
... Petitioner.
Versus
Khilendra Kumar Rajak S/o Numesh Rajak Aged About 29 Years R/o Village-
Gaitara, P.S. And Tahsil- Balodabazar, District- Balodabazar-Bhatapara, C.G.
... Respondent.
(cause title downloaded from CIS Periphery)
Petitioner : Mr. Atul Kumar Kesharwani, Advocate.
For Respondent : None despite service of notice.
(Hon’ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi )
Order on Board
31/08/2026
1. As per the office report, notice has been served upon the respondent.
However, neither the respondent nor any counsel has appeared on his behalf.
2. The petitioner/wife has preferred this transfer petition under Section 24 of
the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (henceforth 'CPC') seeking the transfer of
the divorce petition filed by the respondent/husband, bearing Civil Suit No.
A/74/2026 (Khilendra Kumar Rajak vs. Rani Bai Rajak), from the Family

2
Court, Balodabazar, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara to the Family Court,
Mungeli, District Mungeli (C.G.).
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the marriage between the
parties was solemnized in the month of May, 2019, and out of the said
wedlock, they were blessed with two children, namely, Shivam Rajak and
Vikas Rajak. He further submits that Vikas Rajak, aged about 3 years, is
residing with the petitioner, whereas Shivam Rajak, now aged about 6 years,
is residing with the respondent. He further submits that after some time of
marriage, relations between the parties became sore, compelling the
petitioner to leave the matrimonial home and reside at Mungeli with her
parents. He further submits that the petitioner has no independent source of
income and is unable to travel to the Family Court, Balodabazar for every
hearing due to the round-trip distance of approximately 160 kilometers. He
also contends that it is a well-settled principle of law that the convenience of
the wife must be kept paramount while considering a transfer petition.
Therefore, it is prayed that the transfer petition be allowed.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the material
placed on record.
5. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sumita Singh -v- Kumar Sanjay and
another [(2001) 10 SCC 41] has observed that if husband files suit against
wife, then convenience of wife must be looked into. Hon'ble Supreme Court
in the case of Rajani Kishor Pardeshi -v- Kishore Babulal Pardeshi [(2005) 12
SCC 237] has observed that the convenience of wife is to be preferred over
the convenience of the husband.
6. In the matter of N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs. A.S. Saravana Karthik (2022 SCC
Online SC 1199), their Lordships of the Supreme Court has held as under:

3
"9. The cardinal principle for exercise of power under
section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure is that the ends
of justice should demand the transfer of the suit, appeal
or other proceeding. In matrimonial matters, wherever
Courts are called upon to consider the plea of transfer,
the Courts have to take into consideration the economic
soundness of both the parties, the social strata of the
spouses and their behavioural pattern, their standard of
life prior to the marriage and subsequent thereto and the
circumstances of both the parties in eking out their
livelihood and under whose protective umbrella they are
seeking their sustenance to life. Given the prevailing
socio-economic paradigm in the Indian society, generally,
it is the wife's convenience which must be looked at
while considering transfer.”
7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the well-
settled legal position prioritizing the convenience of the wife in matrimonial
disputes, and the fact that the petitioner is residing with a minor child aged
about 3 years, this Court is of the opinion that it is just and proper to transfer
the proceedings to the Family Court, Mungeli. This will mitigate hardship for
the petitioner/wife and facilitate regular proceedings.
8. Consequently, the transfer petition is allowed. It is ordered that Civil Suit No.
A/74/2026 (Khilendra Kumar Rajak vs. Rani Bai Rajak) be transferred from
the Family Court, Balodabazar, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara to the Family
Court, Mungeli, District Mungeli (C.G.), for trial and disposal in accordance
with law.
9. The transferor Court is directed to transmit the record of the case to the
transferee Court within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt or
communication of this order.

4
10. Further, the transferee Family Court is directed to expedite the trial and
conclude the proceedings expeditiously, preferably within a period of 4
months from the date of receipt of the record. The parties are directed to
cooperate with the Family Court for an early and efficacious disposal of the
case.
11. However, the respondent/husband shall be at liberty to join the proceedings
before the Family Court through video conferencing on dates when his
personal appearance is not explicitly required by the court.
12. Pending interim applications, if any, stand disposed of.
Sd/-
(Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi)
Judge
Ajay