Court directs respondent to bear travel and stay expenses for petitioner, emphasizes alternative hearing methods
In a significant ruling, the Madhya Pradesh High Court has denied a petition to transfer a matrimonial case from Gardarwara to Narmadapuram, highlighting the insufficiency of mere inconvenience as a ground for transfer. The case, Smt. Ranjana Chouksey Alias Shrim Chouksey v. Vaibhav Rai, was presided over by Justice Deepak Khot, who emphasized that alternative arrangements such as video conferencing can mitigate the petitioner's concerns.
The petitioner, Smt. Ranjana Chouksey, sought the transfer of the divorce proceedings initiated by her husband, Vaibhav Rai, citing difficulties in traveling 150 kilometers from Narmadapuram to Gardarwara. The petitioner, a homemaker, argued that she was dependent on her family and faced substantial hardship traveling with her infant child.
However, the respondent opposed the transfer, arguing that the case's merits require it to be heard in Gardarwara, where the matrimonial home is situated, and offered to cover the petitioner’s travel and accommodation expenses for court appearances.
The court, referencing precedents like Anindita Das v. Srijit Das and Preeti Sharma v. Manjit Sharma, noted that the Supreme Court has shifted from its earlier lenient stance on such petitions, now requiring substantial reasons beyond mere inconvenience. Justice Khot directed that the respondent should pay for second-class AC train tickets and reasonable accommodation for the petitioner and her companion when required to attend court in Gardarwara. Furthermore, the court encouraged the use of video conferencing for subsequent hearings, ensuring convenience without compromising judicial proceedings.
This decision underscores the judiciary's inclination towards leveraging technology to ease logistical burdens in legal processes, while maintaining the integrity of court proceedings.
Bottom Line:
Transfer petition for matrimonial case - Mere inconvenience of the petitioner is not a sufficient ground for transfer - Instead, arrangements for travel and stay expenses can be made by the respondent to ensure the convenience of the petitioner - Video conferencing can also be an alternative for hearings.
Statutory provision(s): Civil Procedure Code, 1908 Section 24
