RAMYANI MUKHERJEE Vs. ARNAB MUKHERJEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereafter 'CPC' for short) filed by the wife/petitioner praying for transfer of Matrimonial suit No.59 of 2019 filed by the opposite party praying for dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce from the Fast Track Court of the learned Additional District Judge, Kalyani at Nadia to a court of competent jurisdiction at Siliguri.

(2.) The application under Section 24 of the CPC discloses the fact that marriage of the parties was solemnised on 27th January, 2012 at Kolkata according to Hindu Rights and Customs. After marriage the petitioner went to her matrimonial home. However after few days of marriage she was subjected to mental torture by her husband and other matrimonial relations. The opposite party is an employee of National Thermal Power Corporation (NTPC). At the time of marriage, he used to stay at Lucknow. The petitioner stayed with her husband up to 2015 at Lucknow. Subsequently, the opposite party was transferred to Hazaribagh. The petitioner stayed with her husband at Hazaribagh till November, 2017. During her stay with her husband, she was regularly abused and tortured. Finally, she was driven away from the rented house of her husband on 9th December, 2018. Finding no other alternative, she took shelter at her paternal home at Siliguri. She has been spending her days as a destitute lady fully dependent upon her old ailing parents. The petitioner has no source of income. Except her old parents and a younger sister who is a student, there is no other person at her matrimonial home. Therefore, it would be not only inconvenient, but also impossible to contest the said matrimonial suit at Kalyani travelling all the way from Siliguri. It is also pleaded by the petitioner that Siliguri is situated at a distance of about 650 km. from Kalyani. There is no other person except her old ailing father to accompany the petitioner to Kolkata. Moreover, the petitioner apprehends that she may be harassed at Kalyani in the hands of the friends and relatives of the opposite party. It is also stated by the petitioner that she is suffering from overian cyst. The doctor has advised her for surgery. In such condition of her health, the petitioner will face practical inconvenience to contest the said matrimonial suit at Kalyani. Her husband/opposite party, on the other hand, is presently posted at Ranchi, Jharkhand and working as Manager, Human Resource, NTPC. Accordingly the petitioner has prayed for transfer of the said matrimonial suit to a Court of learned Additional District Judge, Siliguri for trial and disposal.

(3.) The opposite party has not filed any affidavit-in-opposition against the application under Section 24 of the CPC. Therefore, factual averment made out by the petitioner on solemn affirmation has not been controverted by the opposite party.