DIPIKABEN BHAVESHKUMAR SHAH Vs. BHAVESHKUMAR MANHARLAL SHAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PRESENT application has been preferred by the applicant under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 for transfer of two different proceedings initiated by the respondent herein, one being Hindu Marriage Petition No. 20 of 2011 seeking divorce, pending in the Court of learned Senior Civil Judge at Ankleshwar and other being Misc. Civil Application (under Guardian and Wards Act) No. 257 of 2011 for appointing the Guardian, pending in the District and Sessions Court at Bharuch.

(2.) RULE issued by this Court has been duly served upon the respondent and learned advocate Mr. M. M. Saiyed has appeared on behalf of the respondent.

(3.) PER contra, the learned advocate for the respondent ­ husband, has vehemently opposed the application. The learned advocate for the respondent submitted that the transfer application is not maintainable as the aforesaid proceedings are pending at different stages and certain facts are required for separate adjudication. Moreover, the learned advocate for the respondent submitted that there is enough frequency of trains as well as of road transport for commutation to and fro from Vadodara to Bharuch/Ankleshwar. The learned advocate further submitted that looking to the pendency of cases at the Vadodara Court, it may take several years in deciding the aforesaid proceedings. The learned advocate further submitted that the respondent herein has a reasonable apprehension of being attacked by the relatives of the applicant herein at Vadodara. The learned advocate for the respondent submitted that the respondent is ready and willing to pay the expenses, that may be incurred by the applicant, for attending the aforesaid proceedings filed by the respondent, and as such, as observed by the Hon'ble the Apex Court, when the respondent ­ husband is ready and willing to bear the expenses to be incurred by the applicant for attending the aforesaid proceedings, transfer of the application/s can be refused. In support of his submissions, the learned advocate for the respondent relied upon the decisions of the Hon'ble the Apex Court, reported in (2004) 13 SCC 364, (2004) 13 SCC 436 and (2004) 13 SCC 411. Last but not the least, the learned advocate for the respondent ­ husband submitted that the present application may be dismissed.