High Court Karnataka High Court

Smt Romila W/O Suresh Gokavi vs Suresh S/O Daya Gokavi on 16 December, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Smt Romila W/O Suresh Gokavi vs Suresh S/O Daya Gokavi on 16 December, 2009
Author: B.S.Patil
CP E'£o.501 of 2009

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD

DATED THIS THE rem DAY OF DECEMBE;'R--  " 
BEFORE ° ' i 'T
THE HON'BLZE MR.JUs1fic1§iB;s;?A;r-Ii.'s   '  
cnvn.PETn10§LNa5G;/2009Trad"'*V
BETWEEN: 2 V
Smt. Romila, W/0 surggsh M, 
Aged about 32 years, " t T *  s}  
Occ: Nil, R/0 Mission CQr1'1pVou.r1d,  V
Betageri--Gadag,:'    _  ~  '
Taluk 82; District       ...PETITIONER

(By Sri.   

ANDE

Sure sh,  0 _' Dayia . 
Aged; about 40. years, "
Oc<_:':' ':'ErI_1_p1Qyee in A NWKRTC

 i  'R./'oi"No:."28  Vikas Nagar,
 E-£urb1i,_ Dh'a;'*wxad._ District. ...RESPONDENT

(B5/s’Sri. Advocate)

This civil petition is filed under Section 24 of the

‘=.”C.odej. of Civil Procedure praying to transfer

M.C.’No.10/ 2008 pending before the Principal District

arid Sessions Judge, Dharwad to the Principai District
V’ “‘a”r1d Sessions Judge at Gadag in the interest ofjustice.

CP E\Fo.SO1 of 2009

This civi} petition coming on for admissiorfthis

day, the Court made the following:
O R I) E R

In this petition fiied under Section iii
of Civil Procedure, petitioner is 3
transfer M.C.No.10/ 2008 tiefore_ti1e””~–i§rir1oipal S’ S
District and Sessions ,gIndgeV$i-‘flhsirifiad, toithewfirincipai

District and Sessions

that to be later on assigned to II

Additionalfglivil 4Dn.}, Hubli, and is numbered

as /” request of the petitioner is to

‘trar:sf’er_ this_h'(2ase to Gadag as she is residing with her

bmitheri fsisters at Gadag along with two minor

‘ . V chilciren; it it

is .es.__.3.i”The husband–respondent herein has filed the

fjetition under Section 10 of the Divorce Act seeking a

CF 530.501 of 2009

decree of divorce to dissolve the marriage of the
petitioner and the respondent which is pendingV:’in:’–Vth.e

Court of Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.), Hubli.

4. Learned counsel for the
through the pleadings contends the
wife has got two minor She serious
hardship and every time
the case is posted submits that
having regaiiigg the children,
petitionerVc’a*n_i:io:it–: lewavej travel to Hubli.

for the respondent,

however, th_at.,ithe matter is at the stage of

evidence’. and “”it«…__.will not take much time if the

‘res’pon’d,ent”adduces her evidence and, therefore, there

this stage, to transfer the proceedings to

‘r__Gadag He also submits that the respondent is an

A “:if”_enipl’oyee in NWKRTC and it may be difficult to secure

it leave for him.

CP N0.501 of 2009

6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties
and on perusal of the materials on record,
the grievance made by the petitioner
considered favourably. The factitliiati’
two minor children staying».vvithAlh.e:r’-at
distance between Gadag 50
I{ms., is required to grievance
made by the petitionerVV_tl:1§a_t for her to
travel to is posted, to

defend hersgelfiiis ‘Therefore, in the ends of

justice}, it. ‘direct transfer of the case

pending before >’LA:!’C_’lVd’l..tl..0n-a,1 Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.),

1~1ui;1%f1§%, in VM.C;No,___1_2.2/2008 to the learned Principal

C;ivil.’ Judge iS1′,.._Dn.), Gadag.

A Peti’tio.nis accordingly allowed.

seie
313383