Matrimonial proceedings may be transferred to the wife’s location upon establishing genuine hardship and childcare constraints.

The petitioner-wife sought transfer of C.P. No. 105 of 2025, pending before the Family Court, Baripada, to the Family Court, Balasore.

She claimed to be a deserted woman with no independent income, residing with her aged parents and dependent on her father for her and her seven-year-old child’s livelihood.

The husband appeared but filed no written objection. On instructions, his counsel stated that he had no objection to the transfer, while submitting that the husband, being a businessman based at Baripada, might face difficulty attending proceedings at Balasore.

The wife also had Guardian Misc. Case No. 15 of 2022 and Execution Misc. Case No. 109 of 2025 pending before the Family Court, Balasore.

1. Whether C.P. No. 105 of 2025 should be transferred from the Family Court, Baripada, to the Family Court, Balasore, considering the circumstances of the petitioner-wife and the absence of opposition from the husband.

2. Whether appropriate procedural directions should be issued to facilitate the parties’ participation, including virtual appearance and coordinated listing of the connected proceedings.

The Court applied the general principle governing transfer of matrimonial and family-court proceedings, namely that the court may transfer a proceeding when the circumstances of the parties, convenience of adjudication, and interests of justice so warrant.

For facilitating participation, the Court referred to the Orissa High Court Video Conferencing for Courts Rules, 2020, permitting virtual appearance with the concerned court’s permission, while requiring physical presence where necessary for effective hearing, including examination and cross-examination of witnesses.

The Court considered the wife’s asserted hardship—her alleged desertion, lack of income, responsibility for a minor child, and dependence on her aged parents—as supporting transfer to Balasore.

This consideration was reinforced by the husband’s lack of written objection and his counsel’s statement that he had no objection to the transfer, notwithstanding his request for virtual participation because of business commitments at Baripada.

The Court further found that transfer would promote convenience because two related proceedings were already pending before the Family Court, Balasore; it therefore directed coordinated listing of all three matters on a single date where practicable.

To balance the parties’ convenience, the Court permitted virtual appearance subject to the Family Court’s permission and the need for physical presence during effective hearings.

The Family Court, Baripada, was directed to transmit the record in C.P. No. 105 of 2025 to the Family Court, Balasore, preferably within seven days of production of the certified judgment.

The Family Court, Balasore, was directed to re-register the case if necessary, proceed in accordance with law, and endeavour to conclude it by the end of March 2027.

Both parties were permitted to seek virtual appearance with the court’s permission, subject to mandatory physical presence when required for effective hearings.

The three connected proceedings were directed to be listed together where possible, and the parties were directed to avoid unnecessary adjournments and cooperate in early disposal.

The interim order dated 7 August 2025 was vacated, and the judgment was ordered to be communicated to both Family Courts.