High Court Karnataka High Court

Smt Rehana vs Mohammedshafi on 16 September, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Smt Rehana vs Mohammedshafi on 16 September, 2009
Author: A.S.Bopanna
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
CIRCUIT BENCE AT DHARWAD

DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY or sEPTEMBEfz,"2:d:j9..f'  .

BEFORE   _

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A;s..§Bdp._A1§NA"'   7

CIVIL PETITIGN-N_p.5fi4,1'20a9  
BETWEEN: % % A '

SMTREHANA w/0  ; 
MOHAMMEDSHAFI UDAGAT'TI;.  
AGE:34 YEARS,    ..
occ:HousEHQ:.Dv--w0:2K,?  .  
R/O c/0 HUs;sA1}:;*~s,m3"ABp"LJL(3A.NI* " 
SHIRAHA'I"3'-I"; " Q      '
SOOLMAT'I'i,_f  " *

NEAR - '
HAVERLA . _ -x,',fg'_
DIST:HA\/'ERIE.   ._  '  PETITIONER

(By s§ri';:?RAKAsI{s'.'SU§z1<AD,ADv.)

 '---MC)~I<IVAMvM.E'1§SHAFI S /0

KARIVMSAB-"EL:JI§'AGATTI,
AG:..__:37_ YEARS,
OCCDRIVER,

 '-»»NwKR'r,C; 1 DEPOT,
..'E»..13EL;;;AuM,
- " .£€/.O_l'{URBAR GALLI,
  ANAGOL,
'  H B?ELGAUM,DIST:BELGAUM.  RESPONDENT

J

-D

(By Sri. VISHWANATH VBADIGER, ADV.)

THIS CIVIL PETITION FILEDTUINDER 2470?”.
CPC PRAYING TO TRANSFER’-._ THE o..1si.No.5,(‘2.o’o9_’
PENDING ON THE FILE oi? THE FAMILY_~_iCOU~RT:. ‘ATM

BELGAUM, To THE ADDLICI-VIL woos 1<JR;.I3N.,,) AND

JMFC, HAVERI WHERE THJFQVICR.MISC;51';!20£)9W FOR
MAINTENANCE Is PENDING. '' _ 9
THE CIVIL PETITION Co'MIN'o ON FoR'"AD'MIssIoN
THIS DAY, THE COURT Mi¢_DE__TIri_E FOLLOWING:
oRD;E_13 "

.petitioner4V’iisg”i>ei”o–re’ this Court seeking transfer of

the suit in”OILS;No[=5/’2VOO§”‘pie’nding on the file of Family Court,

Belgaugrni; to the of ikddi. Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) I-Iaveri.

2 relationship between the parties is not in dispute.

i The petitiio’ner.3’is the wife of the respondent. The respondent

ginsti’tuited the suit in question bearing O.S. No. 5/2009

it Tithe Family Court at Belgaum seeking for the relief of

uh”‘–.;res_titution of conjugal rights. The petitioner has contended

J

*0

with regard to the severai litigation between the partiesi_’earE.i’er

and in the said circurnstance has sought that it

for the petitioner to attend the Court. at Beif,i§iaiii1AfiV.as’ Vshei

presently residing with her parentslkat is

context the transfer has been sought. The 1esp’o_nden-thowever.J’

opposed the petition by stating working
as a driver in N.W.K.R.T.iC’–i..iand’as Suit is transfermd
to the Haveri since there
would be heiariin’gi:dates.

3. contended, it is seen
that the7Rtna_rriaVig;e”to{ has taken place at I-Iaveri and
in any event the would have jurisdiction to

entert.fiin the is11_it.'”ii That apart, there is already iitigation

2,-,’}’5ctv’v’f:C1’1 thew parties in Haveri in Cr}. Misc. No.

petitioner in any event is residing at Haveri

with her parents and aiready the respondent has taken steps to

appear inthe Cr}. Misc. Petition, it is just and necessary that

it prayer made in this petition be granted. However, what is

be noticed is that the suit cannot be transferred to the Civii

J

‘I’

Judge (Jr.Dn.) and as such the appropriate Order is ‘::_o°transfer

the suit from the Belgaurn Family Court to the

Judge at Haveri. –

Accordingly the following; V
The suit in o.s.;__ No. 5/Nessa=.penciing_ignpgvvvéihe file of
Family Court, Belgaurn said Court and
transferred to the Court of vatv,.'[–IJ’averi, who shall
entertain the pthxejxpardtiestddaremrepresented by their
learned counsel shall appear before the
District Judge, 9.009 as the first date of
appearance ar1d._gétlaereattétrgdg’ District Judge shall
regulate ” f ‘t1Ifth er J
V. . To{p_the the above petition is disposed of.

No oirderaspto:oos’ts;;.._L§
1 C Sd/__
IUDGE

‘ h ct«~Krm*