PURVABEN W/O HIRENBHAI SOLANKI D/O VALLABHBHAI VEGAD vs HIRENBHAI CHAGANBHAI SOLANKI
- Court
- Gujarat High Court
C/MCA/742/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/10/2026
(GJHC240196872026)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR TRANSFER) NO. 742 of 2026
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.N.RAY
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
✓
==========================================================
PURVABEN W/O HIRENBHAI SOLANKI D/O VALLABHBHAI VEGAD
Versus
HIRENBHAI CHAGANBHAI SOLANKI
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR YOGESHKUMAR A RATANPARA(7260) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR PJ KANABAR(1416) for the Opponent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.N.RAY
Date : 13/10/2026
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. Rule. Mr. P.J.Kanabar, learned advocate waives service
of notice of rule on behalf of the respondent.
2. The present application has been filed by the present
applicant seeking transfer of Family Suit No.125 of 2025
pending before the learned Family Court, Amreli to the
learned Family Court, Junagadh.
3. Heard learned advocates for the respective parties.
Page 1 of 6
Uploaded by BINA SHAH(HC00353) on Fri Oct 16 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 16 11:55:44 IST 2026
C/MCA/742/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/10/2026
(GJHC240196872026)
4. Mr. Yogeshkumar A.Ratanpara, learned advocate for the
applicant submits that the applicant has to spend huge
amount towards fees and since the applicant has no
substantial source of income, the applicant is finding it very
difficult to attend the matter at Amreli. That, the distance
between Amreli to Junagadh is approximately 100 kms.
5. Mr.P.J.Kanabar, learned advocate for the respondent
has strongly objected to the assertions made by learned
Counsel for the applicant and requested this Court to dismiss
the present application.
6. At this stage, it would be profitable to refer to the ratio
laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of N. C. V.
Aishwarya Vs. A. S. Saravana Karthik Shah, reported in
2022 LiveLaw (SC) 627, which has held as under :-
“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.
Page 2 of 6
Uploaded by BINA SHAH(HC00353) on Fri Oct 16 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 16 11:55:44 IST 2026
C/MCA/742/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/10/2026
(GJHC240196872026)
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.
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.
11. As noticed above, the appellant is a young lady aged
about 21 years, staying alone along with her aged parents.
Under the above circumstances, it is difficult for her to travel
all the way from Chennai to Vellore to attend the court
proceedings of the case filed by the respondent seeking
annulment of marriage. Further, it is also just and proper to
club all the three cases together to avoid multiplicity of the
proceedings and conflict of decisions. Therefore, the High
Court was not justified in rejecting transfer petition bearing
TR.C.M.P.No.473 of 2020, filed by the appellant herein.”
7. The fountainhead of protective discrimination is found in
the provisions of the Constitution, as under:-
“15. Prohibition of discrimination on grounds of
religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth:-
15(3). Nothing in this article shall prevent the State
from making any special provision for women and children.”
8. In play, Courts have leaned towards lifting barriers of
formal equality and enforcing targeted affirmative actions to
counter physical and sociological disadvantages, thereby
bridging systemic gaps which make the society transition
from one, which merely accepts formal non-discrimination,
Page 3 of 6
Uploaded by BINA SHAH(HC00353) on Fri Oct 16 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 16 11:55:44 IST 2026
C/MCA/742/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/10/2026
(GJHC240196872026)
into one which embraces substantive social justice.
9. Matrimonial disputes form a special category of disputes
where both the parties suffer through the process of litigation
sometimes even more than the malady they were seeking to
redress by invoking legal remedies available to them. The
legal process very often itself becomes the punishment. At the
stage of transfer, this Court is wholly unconcerned with the
merits of the rival allegations. However, the women in
litigation deserve to be protected to that extent, so that the
access to the remedy does not become illusory due to the
inherent difficulties in the path of such women to access the
same. Protective discrimination is a tool of social context
judging by which two inherently inequal parties accessing
legal remedies are deliberately discriminated upon, so that
thereafter, they have equal access to the legal remedy. Once
this access is provided so that the parties are equal in their
ability to access the legal remedy, this Court is thereafter
unconcerned with the merits of the allegations.
10. In such circumstances, I deem it appropriate not to refer
much to the “facts” which are essentially in the nature of
Page 4 of 6
Uploaded by BINA SHAH(HC00353) on Fri Oct 16 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 16 11:55:44 IST 2026
C/MCA/742/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/10/2026
(GJHC240196872026)
allegations raised by one party and denied by the other, so
that the learned Courts below in seizin or coming into seizin
of the disputes raised before them may not have their vision
coloured in any manner by the contents of an order which
merely directs transfer of a petition from an inconvenient
jurisdiction of the applicant to a convenient jurisdiction of the
applicant. Thus, the only test is to be applied is the
convenience of the weaker party. While suppression,
misdeclaration etc., on the part of the applicant would always
have their due weightage before any court of law, the
primary ingredient which would influence the decision of the
Court would be whether, by transferring a petition from one
jurisdiction to the other, the Court has been able to balance
the inherent inequality which the party seeking access to legal
remedy is faced with.
11. Considering the averments made by learned advocates
appearing for the respective parties and considering the ratio
as laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of N. C. V.
Aishwarya (Supra), so also considering the hardship of the
applicant, the ends of justice should demand the transfer of
proceeding/s in question under Section 24 of the Code of Civil
Page 5 of 6
Uploaded by BINA SHAH(HC00353) on Fri Oct 16 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 16 11:55:44 IST 2026
C/MCA/742/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 13/10/2026
(GJHC240196872026)
Procedure, 1908. This Court therefore deems it fit to accept
the submissions advanced by the learned advocate for the
applicant and transfer the proceedings i.e., Family Suit No.
125 of 2025 pending before the learned Family Court, Amreli
to the Court of Learned Family Court, Junagadh with all
ancillary proceedings.
12. The present application, thus, is accordingly allowed.
Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.
13. It is expected that the concerned Trial Court should
endeavour to hear all the proceedings together, if any, so as
to avoid multiplicity in trial of the same issues and conflict of
decisions as far as possible. Rule is made absolute to the
aforesaid extent.
(D.N.RAY,J)
BINA SHAH
Page 6 of 6
Uploaded by BINA SHAH(HC00353) on Fri Oct 16 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 16 11:55:44 IST 2026