Transfer of Matrimonial Proceedings to Wife’s Place of Residence Based on Hardship and Pending Litigation

The applicant (wife) filed a transfer petition seeking to move a family suit for divorce, instituted by the opponent (husband) in the Family Court at Ahmedabad, to the Family Court at Junagadh

The applicant resides in Junagadh, which is approximately 300 kilometers from Ahmedabad

She has already initiated multiple legal proceedings against the opponent in Junagadh, including a maintenance application under Section 125 of the CrPC, a domestic violence case, and a criminal complaint under Section 498A of the IPC

The opponent opposed the transfer, citing the applicant’s financial independence from agricultural land and the previous quashing of the 498A complaint against his family members

1. Whether the matrimonial suit pending in the Family Court, Ahmedabad, should be transferred to the Family Court, Junagadh, based on the grounds of hardship and inconvenience to the applicant.

The court followed established principles governing the transfer of matrimonial disputes, which prioritize the convenience of the parties, particularly the wife, in cases involving significant travel distances and multiple litigations.

The court relied on the precedents of Smita Singh v. Kumar Sanjay (AIR 2002 SC 396) and N.C.V. Aishwarya v. A.S. Saravana Karthik Sha (2022 SCC OnLine SC 1199), which underscore that the inconvenience of the wife is a primary consideration in transfer petitions

The court found that the applicant would face substantial hardship traveling 300 kilometers to attend proceedings in Ahmedabad

The court noted that the opponent is already required to attend Junagadh for the existing maintenance and criminal proceedings initiated by the applicant

The court dismissed the opponent’s arguments regarding the applicant’s financial status, noting that the submitted tax records were outdated and her co-ownership of land did not mitigate the physical hardship of travel

The court balanced the equities by observing that the opponent could minimize his own inconvenience by requesting to appear via video conference in Junagadh

The court further directed that the Family Court, Junagadh, should permit the opponent to appear via video conference for the proceedings unless his personal presence is essential for cross-examination or other specific reasons