Matrimonial proceedings may be transferred to ensure consistency of adjudication and minimize hardship to a single mother.

The marriage between the applicant (wife) and the respondent (husband) was solemnized on February 25, 2020.

A daughter, currently aged three, was born out of the wedlock and resides with the applicant.

The applicant alleged dowry harassment, cruelty, and abandonment by the respondent.

Prior to the husband filing for divorce, the applicant instituted proceedings under Section 9 (Restitution of Conjugal Rights) of the Hindu Marriage Act and Section 125 of the CrPC for maintenance at the Family Court, Gwalior.

Subsequently, the respondent filed a petition for divorce under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act (RCS HM No. 87/2024) at the Family Court, Sehore.

The applicant moved the High Court seeking transfer of the divorce case from Sehore to Gwalior, citing the 414 km distance and her hardships as a single mother.

1. Whether the divorce proceedings pending before the Family Court, Sehore, should be transferred to the Family Court, Gwalior, to ensure the convenience of the parties and prevent conflicting judgments.

The court primarily applied Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, which empowers the High Court to transfer suits or proceedings.

It relied on the principle that in matrimonial disputes, the convenience of the wife is a significant factor, especially when she has the custody of a minor child.

Additionally, the court applied the legal doctrine of avoiding "multiplicity of proceedings" and the possibility of "conflicting judgments" when two cases involve identical facts and evidence.

The court evaluated the practical difficulties faced by the applicant, noting that traveling 414 km from Gwalior to Sehore with a three-year-old child for day-to-day proceedings constituted serious hardship.

While the respondent offered to pay travel expenses and suggested video conferencing, the court found these insufficient to outweigh the benefits of consolidation.

The court reasoned that since the Section 9 proceedings filed by the wife and the Section 13 proceedings filed by the husband involve the same set of facts and evidence, hearing them in the same forum (Gwalior) would facilitate judicial efficiency and prevent inconsistent legal outcomes.

The court granted the respondent/husband liberty to appear via Video Conferencing or through counsel.

The Family Court, Gwalior, was directed to consider consolidating the Section 9 and Section 13 matters for simultaneous adjudication.

The Presiding Officer at Sehore was ordered to transmit the records to Gwalior forthwith.