Matrimonial proceeding transferred to wife’s forum; husband permitted virtual appearance except during effective hearings.

The petitioner-wife filed a transfer petition under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking transfer of C.P. No. 30 of 2026 from the Family Court, Bhawanipatna, to the Family Court, Khordha.

The husband appeared but filed no written objection; with the consent of both parties, the matter was heard at the admission stage, with permission for the husband’s counsel to make oral submissions.

The wife relied on the grounds stated in the transfer petition and described herself as a deserted woman.

The husband had no objection to the transfer and stated that Cr.P. No. 46 of 2026, filed at the wife’s instance for maintenance, was already pending before the Family Court, Khordha.

However, as he was serving as a Clerk in the C.D.M.O. Office, Bhawanipatna, he sought permission to participate in the Khordha proceedings through virtual mode to avoid frequent leave and disruption of official duties.

Whether C.P. No. 30 of 2026 should be transferred from the Family Court, Bhawanipatna, to the Family Court, Khordha under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

Whether the husband should be permitted, with the leave of the Family Court, Khordha, to appear through virtual mode on dates when his physical presence is not necessary.

Whether both C.P. No. 30 of 2026 and Cr.P. No. 46 of 2026 should be listed on a common date for the convenience of the parties.

The Court applied Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, which empowers the High Court to transfer a proceeding from one competent subordinate court to another where the circumstances justify such transfer, including considerations of convenience and the interests of justice.

The Court also applied the procedural framework governing electronic appearances under the “High Court of Orissa and District Courts Use of Electronic Communication and Audio-Video Electronic Means Rules, 2025,” permitting virtual participation subject to the concerned court’s permission and requiring physical presence where effective hearing, including examination or cross-examination of witnesses, necessitates it.

No judicial precedent was expressly cited in the judgment.

The Court considered the wife’s stated grounds, her status as a deserted woman, and the husband’s express lack of objection to the transfer, and found sufficient justification to exercise its power under Section 24 CPC.

The transfer would also consolidate the matrimonial and maintenance-related proceedings before the same Family Court at Khordha, thereby promoting convenience and coordinated adjudication.

At the same time, the Court accommodated the husband’s employment-related difficulty by permitting him to seek virtual appearance, subject to the Family Court’s approval and the 2025 electronic-communication rules.

The Court preserved the requirement of physical attendance for effective hearings and other occasions when his presence, or that of his witnesses, was necessary.

The Family Court, Bhawanipatna, was directed to transmit the record in C.P. No. 30 of 2026 to the Family Court, Khordha, preferably within seven days of production of the certified copy of the judgment.

The Family Court, Khordha was directed to re-register the case if necessary, proceed in accordance with law, and endeavour to dispose of it expeditiously.

It was requested to list C.P. No. 30 of 2026 and Cr.P. No. 46 of 2026 on a common date and proceed with them simultaneously.

The husband was permitted to seek virtual appearance, with the concerned court’s permission, except where physical attendance was required for effective hearing, including examination and cross-examination of witnesses.

The parties were directed to ascertain the dates and purpose of listing, avoid unnecessary adjournments, and cooperate in early disposal.

The interim order dated 19 August 2026 was vacated and the interlocutory application was disposed of.