Smt. Mohini Bai v. Bodhi Ram Sonkar

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR TPC No. 65 of 2019 Smt. Mohini Bai, W/o- Bodhi Ram Sonkar, Aged about- 27 years, D/o- Shri Girdhari Sonkar, R/o- Village & Post Arjunda, P.S. Arjunda, District- Balod (C.G.) ---- Petitioner

Versus

Bodhi Ram Sonkar, S/o- Shukhiram Sonkar, Aged about- 28 years, R/o- Village- Mundra, P.S.- Mujgahan, Post- Tekari, Tehsil Abhanpur, District- Raipur (C.G.) ---- Respondent ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioner : Mr. Vijay Kumar Sahu, Advocate.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Justice Ram Prasanna Sharma Order On Board /09/2019

1. This is wife's petition filed under Section 24 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 for transfer of the petition filed under Section 13-A of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for divorce registered as Case No. 260 of 2017 (Bodhi Ram Sonkar Vs. Smt. Mohini Bai) filed before 2nd Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Raipur (C.G.) to the Family Court at Balod (C.G.).

2. As per the petitioner, the marriage between the parties was solemnized on 7th March, 2014 as per Hindu customs and traditions. Out of their wedlock, one child was born namely Bhavya who is presently living with the petitioner at Balod in paternal house of the petitioner. The petitioner has to suffer a lot for attending the Court at Raipur and she has to maintain minor child whereas the respondent can travel to Balod because he has no burden with him.

3. An application was moved by the petitioner for granting expenses of traveling to Raipur from Village- Arjunda, District- Balod as also for diet expenses and cost of litigation. The said Family Court

granted expenses of traveling and diet and further granted Rs. 5,000/- as cost of litigation to the petitioner and that order has not been challenged anywhere and the same attained finality.

4. Now the point for consideration before this Court is whether it is a fit case to transfer the case pending before Raipur to the Court at Balod. The petitioner earlier filed an application for traveling and diet expenses to attend the Court at Raipur (C.G.) and cost of litigation is already granted by the said Court, therefore, relief has already been granted to the petitioner. In view of the above, it is not a case to transfer the case to the Family Court at Balod.

5. Accordingly, this transfer petition is liable to be and is hereby dismissed at motion stage itself.

Sd/- (Ram Prasanna Sharma) Judge Vasant