MAYA JAIN Vs. SANJAY KUMAR JAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition under Section 23 (3) of the Code of Civil Procedure read with Section 21-A of the Hindu Marriage Act has been filed for transfer of Civil Suit No. 353-A/97 pending between the parties from the Court of IV Additional District Judge, Jabalpur to the Court at Nagpur.

(2.) THE averments made in the petition are : The parties were married at Nagpur on 15. 2. 1994. The respondent/husband has filed petition for divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act, which is registered as Civil Suit No. 353-A/1997 and pending in the Court of IV Additional District Judge, Jabalpur. It has been averred that the petitioner at present is living at Nagpur with her parents as she was turned out of her matrimonial home. The parents of the petitioner are ill and old. Father of the petitioner is a heart patient and remains in bed under medical advice. Three brothers of the petitioner have separated and are looking after their own business. The petitioner belongs to conservative Jain family and it would reflect negatively on her reputation, if she moves alone from Nagpur to Jabalpur for attending Court cases. It is even otherwise inconvenient for her to come to Jabalpur alone. In one of her visits with her younger brother Rajesh and another close relative, when she went to her matrimonial home for making endeavour for compromise, she was threatened with dire consequences by the respondent. The petitioner has no income of her own and cannot meet the expenses of her visits for attending Court proceedings and, therefore, she would be unable to pursue her case at Jabalpur. It was, therefore, prayed that the above civil suit be transferred from Jabalpur to Nagpur. The application is supported by an affidavit of the petitioner.

(3.) THE respondent, in his written reply, denied the above allegations. It is stated therein that Section 21-A of the Hindu Marriage Act provides that if both the parties to the marriage have filed a suit for judicial separation and divorce at two different places, then the subsequently instituted suit should be transferred to the Court where the first suit has been instituted. It was averred that since the petitioner had not filed any suit or petition at Nagpur and since only the suit filed by the respondent/husband is pending at Jabalpur, Section 21-A of the Hindu Marriage Act is not applicable. It is further averred that the personal convenience of the petitioner cannot be a ground for transfer of the suit. It has been averred that maintenance pendente lite has been fixed and is being paid by the respondent/ husband regularly and the amount of interim maintenance has also been withdrawn by the petitioner-wife. It was also averred that the respondent-husband is in the service of M. P. Electricity Board and posted at Jabalpur and only is entitled to limited leave. The respondent-husband would be required to continuously avail leave in the event of case being transferred to Nagpur. As against this, the petitioner will not be required to avail of any leave as she is not in employment. She can come to Jabalpur with any of her brothers. It has further been averred that the language of the Court at Nagpur is Marathi with which the respondent is not conversant. Moreover, if the case is transferred to Nagpur, the record of the case will be required to be translated, which will delay the proceedings of the case. The witnesses of the respondent reside at Jabalpur and in case the case is transferred, it would greatly prejudice the respondent-husband.