BPPI PAUL Vs. RANJAN PAUL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, filed by the petitioner for transfer of Title Suit (Divorce) No. 62 of 1999 filed by the opposite party in the court of learned District Judge, West Tripura at Agartala in the State of Tripura to the court of learned District Judge, Cachar at Silchar in the State of Assam.

(2.) The grounds indicated in paragraphs 6 and 7 of the application for transfer of the aforesaid suit from the court of learned District Judge, West Tripura at Agartala to the court of learned District Judge, Cachar at Silchar is that the petitioner-defendant is a lady without any financial resources and has no income of her own, and lives under the care of her parents. She is also not accustomed to moving alone by herself. Her father is about 60 years old and a sick person and there is no one except her minor younger brother to escort her to Agartala to attend the court. It has further been stated in paragraph-I of the application that the distance between Silchar and Agartala by road is about 312 bins and the road is unsafe due to activities of the extremists and the said road passes through hilly terrain, and it will therefore be difficult for the petitioner-defendant to under take regular journey to Agartala to attendcourt. It has also been stated in the said paragraph-7 of the application that it will be difficult for the petitioner-defendant to meet the travelling expenses. That apart, the witnesses whom the petitioner-defendant intends to examine in the trial of the suit also reside at Silchar.

(3.) Mr. B.C. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner, relying on the said paragraph-6 and 7 of the application submitted that this is a fit case in which the court should transfer the suit from the court of learned District Judge, West tripura at Agartala to the court of learned District Judge, Cachar at Silchar. Mr. Das pointed out that the opposite party also resides at Teliamura and not at Agartala and that in any case the opposite party has to travel all the distance from Teliamura to Agartala to attend court. In case the suit is transferred from the court at Agartala to the court at Silchar, the opposite party will instead travel from Teliamura to Silchar and, therefore, no prejudice would be caused to the (opposite party by such transfer of the suit. Mr. Das cited a decision of this court in the case of Krishna Roy Choudhury V. Ranjit Roy Choudhury (1995) 3 GLR 370, in which the suit filed by the husband in the court off learned District Judge at Nagaon for restoration of conjugal rights was ordered to be transferred to the court of learned District Judge at Dibrugarh where his wife was residing.