In matrimonial transfer petitions, the convenience of the wife must be prioritized over that of the husband.

The Petitioner (wife) and Respondent (husband) were married on December 11, 2020. Due to alleged mental and physical torture, the Petitioner left the matrimonial home and began residing in Surajpur

The Petitioner initiated three proceedings in Surajpur: a divorce petition (Civil Suit No. A/112/2025), a maintenance application under Section 144 of BNSS, 2023, and an application under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act

Subsequently, the Respondent filed an application for Restitution of Conjugal Rights under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act in the Family Court, Manendragarh

The Petitioner filed this transfer petition under Section 24 of the CPC to move the Respondent's suit from Manendragarh to Surajpur, citing the 200 km travel distance and the fact that the Respondent is already appearing in three other matters in Surajpur

1. Whether Civil Suit No. 162A/2025 pending before the Family Court, Manendragarh should be transferred to the Family Court, Surajpur based on the convenience of the wife

The court applied Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, which governs the general power of transfer and withdrawal of cases

In matrimonial disputes, the wife’s convenience must generally be prioritized given the socio-economic paradigm in Indian society (N.C.V. Aishwarya v. A.S. Saravana Karthik (2022))

Wife’s convenience is to be preferred over the husband’s in transfer petitions arising from matrimonial suits (Sumita Singh v. Kumar Sanjay (2001) and Rajani Kishor Pardeshi v. Kishore Babulal Pardeshi (2005))

The court found that the Petitioner is currently residing in Surajpur and has already initiated three separate legal proceedings there, in which the Respondent has already entered his appearance

Although the Respondent argued that direct bus connectivity exists between the two districts, the court noted that the 200 km distance makes it difficult for the Petitioner to attend proceedings in Manendragarh

Applying the precedents of N.C.V. Aishwarya and Sumita Singh, the court reasoned that transferring the case to Surajpur would not only serve the Petitioner’s convenience but would also benefit the Respondent, as he could attend all four pending litigations in a single forum

The court determined that the ends of justice necessitated the transfer to prevent undue hardship to the wife

The Judge at Manendragarh was directed to transmit the records within 15 days, and the Family Court, Surajpur was directed to conclude the trial expeditiously, preferably within four months. The court further granted the Respondent liberty to appear through Video Conferencing if his personal appearance is required