MUNNIBAI Vs. LOKPRAKASH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, wife of the respondent, has approached this Court by a petition under Sec. 24 of the Civil Procedure Code for transfer of the main suit No. 5-A of 1988 pending before the IInd Additional Judge to the Court of District Judge, Mandleshwar, where in under Sec. 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, the respondent has prayed for divorce.

(2.) The main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner is a lady residing at Indore and it is not convenient to her to attend the proceedings or defend the case at Mandleshwar. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submitted that the marriage was solemnised at Indore. Hence, even though the Court at Mandleshwar has jurisdiction, the Court at Indore has also got jurisdiction to try the suit. The counsel also submitted that in fact, the respondent resides at Indore. He has got ancestral property at Indore but to harass the petitioner, the suit has been filed at Mandleshwar. Looking to the convenience of the parties and to save expenses, the case be transferred from the Court of the Additional District Judge, Mandleshwar, to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Indore. Learned Counsel placed reliance on the cases of this Court reported in Purnima Shrivastava Vs. Sanjeeva Shrivastava, (MPWN 1984 Short Note 570) , Najma Begum Vs. Mohammad Hameel, (1984 MPWN Short Note 105) , Neenadevi Bhatnagar Vs. Mahesh Prasad Bhatnagar, (Vol. 1 1986 DMC 31) , Kamna Vs. Prakash Chand Sohone, (Vol. 1 1985 DMC 403) .

(3.) Learned counsel for the respondent though opposed the application for transfer, but during the course of arguments, contended that the petitioner is delaying the proceedings at Mandleshwar. Learned Counsel submits that though he has no objection for transfer of the suit to Indore, but it may be directed that the suit may be decided at an early date.