- Bookmark
- Share
- CaseIQ
Reena Bahri v. Ajay Bahri .
Factual and Procedural Background
The opinion concerns a transfer petition filed by the wife seeking transfer of matrimonial proceedings (a divorce petition) instituted by the husband and pending before the Additional District Judge, Karkardooma, Delhi. The wife resides in Bombay with a child approximately three years old and states that she has no source of income and no one to travel with her from Bombay to Delhi, which, according to her, impairs her ability to defend the divorce petition. The husband opposed transfer and offered to bear the wife’s travel expenses (including an escort when required) and the travel expenses of her witnesses. The court also noted that proceedings are already pending in Bombay which the husband has to defend.
Legal Issues Presented
- Whether the matrimonial proceedings pending before the Additional District Judge, Karkardooma, Delhi (HMA No. 297 of 1999) should be transferred to a court at Navi Mumbai/Bombay in light of the wife’s stated difficulties in attending proceedings in Delhi.
Arguments of the Parties
Wife's Arguments
- She has a child of about three years with her in Bombay.
- She has no source of income.
- She has no one to travel with her from Bombay to Delhi.
- Due to these circumstances, she is unable to satisfactorily defend the divorce petition in Delhi.
Husband's Arguments
- The transfer petition should be dismissed.
- He would pay for the wife’s transport between Bombay and Delhi along with an escort whenever required.
- He would also pay for the travel of the wife’s witnesses in the matrimonial proceedings.
Table of Precedents Cited
No precedents were cited in the provided opinion.
Court's Reasoning and Analysis
The court found the husband’s offer to pay travel expenses did not address two key circumstances: (i) the wife has a very small child with her in Bombay, and (ii) the wife does not have anyone who can conveniently accompany her to Delhi. The court additionally noted that, as reflected from the counter, there are already proceedings in Bombay that the husband has to defend. Considering these circumstances together, the court concluded that the transfer petition should be allowed.
Holding and Implications
ALLOWED: HMA No. 297 of 1999 pending before the Court of the Additional District Judge, Karkardooma, Delhi was transferred to the Court of the District Judge, Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra.
The direct effect is that the matrimonial proceedings will continue before the transferee court in Navi Mumbai. The court clarified that if jurisdiction instead lies with the Family Court at Bombay (and not the District Judge, Navi Mumbai), an appropriate application may be made. No order as to costs. The order does not articulate any broader implications or new precedent beyond effecting the transfer.
Order
1. This is a transfer petition filed by the wife in respect of the matrimonial proceedings filed by the husband before the Additional District Judge, Karkardooma, Delhi.
2. The wife has a child, approximately three years old, with her in Bombay. She avers that she has no source of income and no one to travel with her from Bombay to Delhi. In the circumstances, she is unable to satisfactorily defend the divorce petition. It is contended on behalf of the husband that the transfer petition should be dismissed, and that he will pay for the wife's transport between Bombay and Delhi along with an escort, whenever required, as also pay for the travel of her witnesses in the matrimonial proceedings.
3. This misses two points. The first relevant circumstance is that there is a very small child with the wife in Bombay and the second is that the wife does not have anybody who can conveniently accompany her to Delhi. Apart from this, as is shown by the counter, there are already proceedings in Bombay which the husband has to defend. We think, in the circumstances, that the transfer petition should be allowed.
4. Accordingly, HMA No. 297 of 1999, pending in the Court of the Additional District Judge, Karkardooma, Delhi is transferred to the Court of the District Judge, Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra.
5. In the event that the jurisdiction vests with the Family Court, Bombay and not the District Judge, Navi Mumbai, an appropriate application may be made.
6. No order as to costs.
Alert