Wife With No Income And Maintenance Case In Bagalkot: Karnataka HC Transfers Husband’s Bengaluru Divorce Case There

The respondent-husband filed a petition under Section 13(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, seeking dissolution of the marriage before the Family Court, Bengaluru.

The petitioner-wife sought transfer of that proceeding to the Family Court, Bagalkot, where she resided and had filed a maintenance proceeding against the respondent.

She submitted that she had no independent income to meet travel expenses and that Bagalkot was approximately 500 km from Bengaluru.

The respondent opposed transfer, citing occupational and financial hardship, and offered virtual participation or payment of reasonable travel and lodging expenses for required court appearances.

The High Court considered the transfer petition under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC).

Section 24 of the CPC empowers the High Court to withdraw and transfer proceedings where appropriate.

In N.C.V. Aishwarya v. A.S. Saravana Karthik Sha, 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 627, the Supreme Court observed that proceedings between the same parties raising common questions of fact or law may desirably be tried together to avoid duplicated trials and conflicting decisions; it also stated that, in the prevailing socio-economic context, the wife’s convenience should generally be considered in matrimonial transfer matters.

The Court found that the wife resided in Bagalkot, lacked an independent source of income to meet travel and related expenses, and faced a journey of approximately 500 km to Bengaluru.

A maintenance proceeding between the parties was already pending before the Family Court, Bagalkot, while the husband’s matrimonial petition was a later proceeding.

Applying the principles in N.C.V. Aishwarya, the Court held that these circumstances established valid grounds for transfer; the respondent’s objections and proposed alternatives did not displace that conclusion.

The parties were directed to appear before that court on 30 November 2026 at 11:00 a.m.; the Registry was directed to communicate the order to the concerned courts.

Pending applications, if any, were disposed of as no longer surviving.