SUJATA MOHANTY Vs. RUDRA CHARAN MOHANTY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER is the wife of the opposite party. This TRP (C) has been filed by the wife under Section 24 CPC with a prayer to transfer Civil Proceeding No. 792 of 2004 filed by the opposite party under Section 13(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act for dissolution of the marriage before the learned Judge, Family Court, Cuttack to similar Court at Rourkela. She has stated that she is having no money to travel all the way from Bonai (in the district of Sundargarh) where she is staying with her poor parents nor anybody to accompany her from Bonai to Cuttack nor has any place of stay at Cuttack.

(2.) LEARNED Counsel for the opposite party -husband resists such prayer of the petitioner contending that the petitioner is not a Purda Nashin lady. She is rather quite used to travelling and she has no difficulty as stated by her. Further, relying on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Kamaljit Kaur v. Prince Singh Chhabra reported in 2006 (I) OLR (SC) 456, he submits that only on the ground that the wife is not able to travel alone the case should not be transferred from one Court to another. He stressed on the observation of the Supreme Court in the said decision which is as follows: No ground is made out by the petitioner except to say that being a lady it is not safe for her to travel from Dhanbad, Jharkhand to Rourkela, Orissa. In our view, this is no ground for transfer at all.