Court Upholds Decision to Retain Proceedings in Gonda, Citing Lack of Credible Evidence for Bias or Threat
In a recent judgment, the Allahabad High Court dismissed a transfer application filed by Nagendra Sharma, seeking to move ongoing matrimonial proceedings from the Family Court in Gonda to Lucknow. The application was dismissed on grounds that allegations of bias and threats were not substantiated with credible evidence, and that the transfer would cause unnecessary delay in the litigation process.
Nagendra Sharma had applied under Section 24 of the Civil Procedure Code, requesting the transfer of Miscellaneous Case No. 52 of 2019, which revolves around a divorce petition initiated under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The application was grounded in claims of bias against the presiding officer and apprehension of threat to the applicant's safety.
The case traces back to an ex-parte judgment dated January 16, 2019, where Nagendra Sharma's marriage to Smt. Sarla Sharma was dissolved by the Family Court in Gonda. Following this, Sarla Sharma filed for recall of the ex-parte order, alleging fraudulent conduct by Nagendra Sharma. The proceedings have been pending since then.
During the hearing, the counsel for Nagendra Sharma argued that the convenience of both parties should be considered, as both parties now reside in Lucknow. Moreover, he expressed concerns regarding personal safety after an alleged attack post-court proceedings in Gonda.
However, the court, presided by Justice Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi, found these claims unsubstantiated. The judgment emphasized that convenience for transfer must consider the best interest of litigation, not merely the applicant's preference. The court noted that legal remedies exist for challenging adverse orders, and such orders alone cannot establish bias unless supported by cogent evidence.
The judgment drew on the Supreme Court's ruling in Sumita Singh v. Kumar Sanjay, emphasizing that in matrimonial disputes, the wife's convenience is paramount. Sarla Sharma, the opposite party, opposed the transfer application, asserting that she faced no inconvenience attending proceedings in Gonda.
The court further highlighted that the applicant had initiated the divorce proceedings in Gonda and the case was nearing final disposal, making a transfer at this stage inadvisable. It was noted that the applicant's conduct suggested a delaying tactic rather than a genuine need for transfer.
Ultimately, the court concluded that no universal rule could be applied to transfer petitions, which should be decided based on individual case facts. The application was dismissed, and the proceedings will continue in Gonda, ensuring expedient resolution without unnecessary delays.
Bottom Line:
Transfer of proceedings under Section 24 of CPC - Allegations of bias or apprehension of threat must be substantiated with credible material - Convenience for transfer must consider both parties and the best interest of litigation, not just the applicant's preference.
Statutory provision(s): Section 24 of CPC, Order IX Rule 13 CPC, Section 151 CPC, Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, Section 504, 506, 323, 452, 380 IPC, Section 482 CrPC, Section 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC, Domestic Violence Act
Nagendra Sharma v. State of U.P., (Allahabad)(Lucknow) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2822101
