Priya Gupta vs. Ishaan Gupta

Facts

The petitioner, Priya Gupta, filed a transfer petition seeking to move a case filed by her husband, Ishaan Gupta (the respondent), from Family Court, Raipur, to Family Court, Ambikapur. The case in Raipur was filed by the respondent under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The petitioner argued for transfer because she resides in Ambikapur, has already filed a criminal case against her husband under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, in Ambikapur, and the distance between Ambikapur and Raipur is approximately 350 km. The respondent, while opposing the transfer, stated that he is currently in jail in a GST case, and his parents are also accused in the Domestic Violence Act case, making travel difficult.

Held

The Court allowed the transfer petition. Considering the existing case filed by the petitioner against her husband under the Domestic Violence Act in Ambikapur, and the substantial distance of over 350 km between Ambikapur and Raipur, the Court found it to be in the interest of justice to transfer the case. The reasoning was based on the principle of convenience for the petitioner and the existing legal connection to Ambikapur. The Court directed that the record of the case filed by the respondent under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Raipur, be transferred to the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Ambikapur, within six weeks from the date of the order. The respondent was granted liberty to move an application for exemption from personal appearance as and when required, which the concerned court would decide in accordance with law.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Civil Case No. 753/2023, pending before the learned Second Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Raipur, filed by the respondent under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, should be transferred to the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Ambikapur, in the interest of justice? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner contended that the transfer is necessary due to her residence in Ambikapur, the pendency of a related criminal case (Domestic Violence Act) filed by her against the respondent in Ambikapur, and the significant distance (over 350 km) between Ambikapur and Raipur, which causes hardship. Reliance was placed on the principle of convenience and the existing nexus with Ambikapur. Respondent's Arguments: The respondent opposed the transfer but highlighted his current incarceration in a GST case and the involvement of his parents in the Domestic Violence Act case, suggesting that travel would be difficult for him. He did not explicitly argue against the transfer on grounds of convenience or jurisdiction but rather on the practical difficulties arising from his personal circumstances.