HINABEN W/O KAPILBHAI PATEL D/O SHANKARBHAI MAGANBHAI PATEL vs KAPILBHAI BALLUBHAI PATEL

C/MCA/2087/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/11/2026
(GJHC240612142026)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR TRANSFER) NO. 2087 of 2026

FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:


HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MAULIK J.SHELAT

==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
✓
==========================================================
HINABEN W/O KAPILBHAI PATEL D/O SHANKARBHAI MAGANBHAI
PATEL
Versus
KAPILBHAI BALLUBHAI PATEL
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR ADITYA T PANCHOLI(13067) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
RULE SERVED for the Opponent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MAULIK J.SHELAT

Date : 06/11/2026

ORAL JUDGMENT
1. Heard Mr. Aditya T. Pancholi, learned advocate for the applicant.
Though served, none appeared for the opponent.
2. The record suggests that the opponent was duly served with the
notice of rule on 24.09.2026. This Court vide its order dated 16.10.2026
passed the following order:
“1. When the matter is called out, Mr. Aditya T. Pancholi,
learned advocate for the applicant is present. Though
served, none present for the opponent.
Page 1 of 4
Uploaded by LALJI AMRUTBHAI DESAI(HC01558) on Fri Nov 06 2026 Downloaded on : Sat Nov 07 02:04:23 IST 2026

C/MCA/2087/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/11/2026
(GJHC240612142026)
2. It appears that the opponent is duly served with the
notice of rule of this application on 24.09.2026.
3. To give one last opportunity to the opponent, in the
interest of justice, stand over to 06.11.2026.”
3. It appears that despite granting an opportunity to the opponent to
appear and respond to this application, he chose not to appear and
contest the matter. Mr. Pancholi, learned advocate for the applicant,
would reiterate his submissions which was advanced by him on
21.08.2026. The order dated 21.08.2026 reads thus:
“1. Heard Mr. Aditya T. Pancholi, learned advocate for the
applicant.
2. At the outset, Mr. Pancholi, learned advocate would request
this Court to allow the draft amendment.
3. The draft amendment is hereby allowed. The same shall
th
be carried out on or before 25 August, 2026.
4. Mr. Pancholi, learned advocate would submit that the
applicant happens to be the wife of the opponent and is residing
at Surat, whereas the opponent has instituted a Family Suit
No.23 of 2026 before the Family Court, Valsad which is sought
to be transferred to the Family Court, Surat.
4.1 It is submitted that the applicant has filed an
application under Section 144 of BNSS, which is pending
before the Family Court, Surat seeking maintenance. It is further
submitted that the applicant is also having the responsibility of
two minor children.
5. Having heard the learned advocate for the applicant
and upon perusal of the averments made in the application, the
matter requires consideration.
Page 2 of 4
Uploaded by LALJI AMRUTBHAI DESAI(HC01558) on Fri Nov 06 2026 Downloaded on : Sat Nov 07 02:04:23 IST 2026

C/MCA/2087/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/11/2026
(GJHC240612142026)
6. Hence, RULE returnable on 16.10.2026. Ad-interim
relief in terms of para-7(C) is granted.”

4. Having heard learned advocate for the applicant and taking note
of the aforesaid order dated 21.08.2026 passed by this Court and so also
averments made in the application which are remained uncontroverted
by the opponent, I am inclined to accept the prayer made by the
applicant in this application.
5. At this stage, it would be fruitful to refer to the ratio laid down by
the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of :- (i) Sumita Singh Versus
Kumar Sanjay - AIR 2002 SC 396 and (ii) N.C.V. Aishwarya
versus A.S. Saravana Karthik Sha - 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1199
: 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 627.
6. In the backdrop as aforesaid, the present application succeeds
and is allowed accordingly. The Family Suit No.23 of 2026, pending
before the Family Court, Valsad is directed to be transferred to the
Family Court, Surat.
7. It is also open for the opponent to request the concerned Court to
join the proceedings through video conferencing /online mode and if
such a request is made by the opponent, the Court concerned may also
consider the same unless the physical presence of the opponent is
Page 3 of 4
Uploaded by LALJI AMRUTBHAI DESAI(HC01558) on Fri Nov 06 2026 Downloaded on : Sat Nov 07 02:04:23 IST 2026

C/MCA/2087/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/11/2026
(GJHC240612142026)
required to attend the proceedings at a particular stage of proceedings.
8. In view of the above, the present application is allowed in terms of
para 7 (B). Rule is made absolute, accordingly.
(MAULIK J.SHELAT,J)
Lalji Desai
Page 4 of 4
Uploaded by LALJI AMRUTBHAI DESAI(HC01558) on Fri Nov 06 2026 Downloaded on : Sat Nov 07 02:04:23 IST 2026