Seema v. Rakesh Kumar ., Supreme Court Of India, Judgment, Law, casemine.com

Factual and Procedural Background

This matter concerns a transfer petition filed by the wife seeking transfer of matrimonial proceedings for restitution of conjugal rights instituted by the husband in Ghaziabad (U.P.) to Jagadhri (Haryana), where she currently resides. She asserts that she cannot effectively defend the proceedings in Ghaziabad due to financial constraints and dependence on her father. A maintenance petition filed by her is pending before the court at Jagadhri.

The husband’s side opposed the transfer, contending that the wife’s appearance in the Ghaziabad proceedings undercuts her claim of financial inability and other difficulties in defending the case there. The court noted that the wife could not allow the restitution petition to go undefended while awaiting the outcome of her transfer petition and recorded that she was admittedly not receiving maintenance from the husband, thereby establishing her financial difficulties.

Legal Issues Presented

Whether the matrimonial proceedings for restitution of conjugal rights should be transferred from Ghaziabad to Jagadhri in light of the wife’s residence and established financial difficulties.

Whether the wife’s act of entering appearance in the Ghaziabad proceedings negates or undermines her claim of inability to defend the case there due to lack of maintenance and financial constraints.

Arguments of the Parties

Wife (Petitioner)

She resides in Jagadhri and is dependent on her father, rendering it difficult to defend proceedings in Ghaziabad effectively.

She is not receiving maintenance from the husband.

Her maintenance petition is pending before the court at Jagadhri.

Husband (Respondent)

Since the wife has already entered appearance in the Ghaziabad proceedings, her assertion of financial inability and related difficulties in defending the case there is incorrect.

Court's Reasoning and Analysis

The court rejected the respondent’s contention that the wife’s appearance in the Ghaziabad proceedings disproved her claimed hardship. It reasoned that the wife could not be expected to allow the restitution petition to proceed undefended pending the transfer request. The court emphasized the admitted fact that the wife was not receiving maintenance from the husband, which established her financial difficulties. In this context, and having regard to her residence in Jagadhri and the pendency of her maintenance petition there, the court concluded that allowing the transfer was appropriate.

Holding and Implications

TRANSFER PETITION ALLOWED; CASE TRANSFERRED.

The court ordered that Case No. 1035 of 1999, pending before the Court of the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Ghaziabad, be transferred to the Court of the Senior Judge, Jagadhri (Haryana). There was no order as to costs.

Implications: The immediate effect is that the restitution of conjugal rights proceedings will continue in Jagadhri, where the wife resides. The opinion does not discuss broader implications or establish a new precedent.

Seema v. Rakesh Kumar .

Order

1. This is a transfer petition filed by the wife. She seeks the transfer of the proceedings for restitution of conjugal rights filed by the husband in Ghaziabad (U.P) to Jagadhri (Haryana) where she now resides. It is her case that she cannot defend the case in Ghaziabad effectively as she is dependent on her father. The maintenance petition that she has filed is pending and it is pending in the Court at Jagadhri. The defence case is that since she has filed her appearance in the matrimonial proceedings at Ghaziabad, her claim of lack of finance and other inability to defend those proceedings is incorrect. We do no appreciate this submission. The wife could not have permitted the petition for restitution of conjugal rights to go undefended before she filed the transfer petition. Having regard to the fact that, admittedly, she is not getting any maintenance from the husband, her financial difficulties are established.

2. In the circumstances, we think that the transfer petition should be made absolute. Case No. 1035 of 1999 pending in the Court of the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Ghaziabad, shall stand transferred to the Court of the Senior Judge, Jagadhri (Haryana).

3. No order as to costs.

Transfer Petition (C) No. 6 of 2000, decided on April 24, 2000

Seema v. Rakesh Kumar .

Factual and Procedural Background

Legal Issues Presented

Arguments of the Parties

Wife (Petitioner)

Husband (Respondent)

Table of Precedents Cited

Court's Reasoning and Analysis

Holding and Implications

Seema v. Rakesh Kumar .

Comments