Convenience of wife and childcare responsibilities outweigh husband's travel objections in matrimonial transfer proceedings.

The petitioner (wife) and respondent (husband) were married on June 20, 2008, and have four children

Due to marital discord, the petitioner was allegedly ousted from the matrimonial home and began residing at her parental home in Kawardha

The respondent filed a divorce petition (Civil Suit No. CS-A/933/2022) before the Family Court, Durg

The petitioner sought transfer of the case to Kawardha, citing her responsibility to care for four children (three of whom are minors), a travel distance of 250 km to Durg, and lack of a companion

The respondent opposed the transfer, citing direct bus/train connectivity and his status as a poor person

1. Whether the divorce proceedings pending before the Family Court, Durg should be transferred to the Family Court, Kawardha based on the wife's convenience and socio-economic circumstances?

Section 24 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, which governs the general power of transfer and withdrawal of suits

In matrimonial matters, the wife's convenience is paramount and courts must consider the economic and social strata of the parties [N.C.V. Aishwarya v. A.S. Saravana Karthik (2022)]

In suits filed by the husband, the wife's convenience must be looked into [Sumita Singh v. Kumar Sanjay (2001)]

The wife’s convenience is preferred over the husband's [Rajani Kishor Pardeshi v. Kishore Babulal Pardeshi (2005)]

The Court analyzed the petitioner’s situation, noting she is burdened with the care of four children, three of whom are minors, making a 250 km to-and-fro journey to Durg without a companion an "immense physical and financial hardship"

The Court further observed that another proceeding for maintenance under Section 144 of the BNSS was already pending in Kawardha

Applying the principle that the wife's convenience takes precedence in matrimonial transfer petitions, the Court found the petitioner’s grounds sufficient to justify the transfer, notwithstanding the respondent's arguments regarding transport connectivity or personal financial status

The Court directed the Durg Court to transmit records within 15 days, instructed the transferee Court to expedite the trial, preferably within four months, and granted the respondent liberty to join proceedings via Video Conferencing