A wife's greater travel hardship can justify transferring matrimonial proceedings to her place of residence.

The applicant-wife sought transfer under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, of Family Suit No. 523 of 2026 from the Family Court at Ahmedabad to the concerned court at Surat.

She resided at Surat, approximately 250 kilometres from Ahmedabad, and submitted that she had no other means of maintaining herself and would face hardship attending proceedings in Ahmedabad.

The opponent objected that he cared for his aged mother, that attending proceedings at Surat would inconvenience him, and that the criminal complaint was false and retaliatory.

1. Whether the Family Suit pending at Ahmedabad should be transferred to Surat, having regard to the parties’ respective circumstances and the comparative inconvenience of attending court.

2. Whether arrangements for common hearing dates or the opponent’s participation by video conference could be considered following transfer.

Section 24 CPC empowers the High Court to transfer proceedings between competent courts.

In exercising that discretion, the Court considered the parties’ circumstances and comparative inconvenience. It referred to Smita Singh v. Kumar Sanjay, AIR 2002 SC 396; N.C.V. Aishwarya v. A.S. Saravana Karthik Sha, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1199; and Ruchi Majoo v. Sanjeev Majoo, (2011) 6 SCC 479, as relevant authorities on transfer applications. The judgment did not set out a separate formulation of the principles from those authorities.

The Court treated the applicant’s residence in Surat and the 250-kilometre distance from Ahmedabad as undisputed.

Weighing her stated hardship in attending the Ahmedabad proceedings against the opponent’s inconvenience, including his responsibility toward his aged mother, the Court found the inconvenience to the applicant greater and exercised its discretion in her favour.

It also left open procedural accommodations for the opponent after transfer.

The opponent may request common dates for the transferred suit and other proceedings at Surat, and may seek to participate by video conference or online, subject to the court’s consideration and any requirement of physical presence. Rule was made absolute.