Preeti Deepak Bhatia v. Deepak S. Bhatia

Shubhada S Kadam 28-mca-220-2023.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION MISCELLANEOUS CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 220 OF 2023 Preeti Deepak Bhatia ... Applicant versus Deepak S. Bhatia .... Respondent Mr. Narendra Kumar Singh, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr. Prince Kumar Upadhyay along with Ms. Gauri, Advocates for the Respondent.

CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.

DATE : 8th MARCH, 2024.

P.C. :

1.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant.

2.

By this applicant, the applicant is seeking transfer of divorce petition filed by the respondent-husband, which is pending before the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Kalyan to Family Court at Bandra. 3.

It is contention of learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is doing job at Mumbai and staying at Powai with her parents and applicant's financial condition is not good to attend the Court's dates at Kalyan. The respondent is working in Mumbai. The applicant has filed proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act and Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, which are pending before the Metropolitan Magistrate's Court at Andheri. The applicant is finding it inconvenient to attend the Court's dates at Kalyan. Hence, requested to allow the SHUBHADA SHANKAR KADAM application.

SHUBHADA SHANKAR KADAM Date: 2024.03.11 16:26:15 +0530 1/2

Shubhada S Kadam 28-mca-220-2023.doc 4.

It is the contention of learned counsel for the respondent that, after filing of divorce proceedings, to counter it, the applicant has filed proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act and Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 against the respondent. The applicant stays at Powai, her financial condition is good and she is a working woman. Earlier, the applicant was working in Dubai, if she can come from Dubai to Mumbai, she can attend the Court's dates at Kalyan. Hence, requested to reject the application.

5.

I have heard both learned counsel. The applicant stays at Mumbai. She seeks transfer on the ground that her financial condition is not good. It appears that the applicant is a working women, so no question of facing financial crisis arises. It appears that, to counter the divorce proceedings, the applicant is seeking transfer of divorce petition from Kayan to Mumbai. I do not find substance in the application. Hence, I pass the following order :

O R D E R

1.

The application is rejected.

(SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.) 2/2