VIDHYA SHANKAR IYER Vs. SHANKAR NAGRAJ IYER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Counsel for the parties. Perused the pleadings. The affidavit which is tendered across the bar on behalf of the respondent be filed in the registry in the course of the day.

(2.) By this petition, the petitioner seeks transfer of M. J. Petition No. A-502/2005 from the family Court, Nagpur to the Family Court No. 3 at mumbai, where the application moved by the applicant for relief of maintenance under section 125 of the code of Criminal Procedure is pending. The ground stated in the application is that the applicant is jobless and has no source of income to maintain herself. The applicant is solely dependant on her brother who is presently looking after her needs including the education of her daughter. The applicant has no financial support nor in a position to travel alone all the way to Nagpur to contest divorce petition filed by the respondent husband. Besides, it is stated that the daughter of the applicant Swati is presently aged 3 years and studying in Junior K. G. class. It will be difficult for the applicant to travel to Nagpur alongwith her daughter on every date of hearing of the petition; besides the applicant is terrified on account of the behaviour of the respondent husband and in-laws which she had to undergo during her stay in the matrimonial home.

(3.) This application is resisted by the respondent on the ground that the excuse given by the applicant that she is unemployed lady and totally dependent on her brother and that hard-pressed to defend the proceedings at Nagpur is no ground for transfer. To buttress this submission, reliance is placed on the decision of the Apex court in the case of Preeti Sharma V/s. Manjit Sharma reported in (2005) 535 11 Supreme Court Cases 535. It is stated that the applicant's married sister is at Nagpur and it is not as if the applicant will have to stay alone. Indeed, the decision relied upon by the counsel for the respondent does indicate that the Apex Court has observed that merely because the petitioner is unemployed lady and fully dependent on her relatives, cannot be the ground for transfer of proceeding. It is observed that the hardship of the wife for undertaking travel can be mitigated by providing expenses for travel and stay. Relying on the decision of the Apex Court, the learned counsel for the respondent submits that the respondent is willing to offer appropriate travel and stay expenses to the applicant.