← Library
Bombay High CourtMCA/41/2025application allowed

Uma Prakash Ghate Alias Sau. Dnyaneshwari Swapnil Uchche v. Swapnil Manik Uchche

2025-12-01Hon'Ble Shri Justice Kishore C. Sant2 pages

- 1 - mca41.25.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 41 OF 2025 Uma Prakash Ghate Alias Sau. Dnyaneshwari Swapnil Uchche ....Applicant

VERSUS

Swapnil Manik Uchche .....Respondent Mr. G. V.Padalkar, Advocate holding for Mr. A. D. Soman, Advocate for Applicant.

CORAM : KISHORE C. SANT, J.

DATE : 1st DECEMBER, 2025.

PER COURT :

1.

Heard learned Advocate for the Applicant. None for the Respondent.

2.

This Application is filed by the wife seeking transfer of the proceeding for declaration of marriage as void under Section 11 of the Hindu Marriage Act. She has also filed two proceedings in the Court at Aurangabad, one under Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class at Aurangabad and another claiming maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in the Family Court at Aurangabad. Learned Advocate for the Applicant submits that this is a fit case where Application needs to be allowed.

- 2 - mca41.25.odt 3.

After hearing learned Advocate for the Applicant and by going through the Application, it is seen that two proceedings are already pending in the Court at Aurangabad. It would be therefore, in the interest of justice to allow the Application. Application is therefore allowed in terms of prayer clause 'B'.

4.

After the proceeding is transferred, the learned Judge, Family Court, Aurangabad, is requested to try and dispose of the proceeding as early as possible and preferably within a period of 18 months from today. As far as possible, the dates be given as per the convenience of the husband looking tot he dates given in the other proceedings. Wife not to seek unnecessary adjournments.

If unnecessary adjournments are sought, the Court to pass appropriate order compensating the husband if he remains personally present before the Court. If Respondent makes a request seeking permission to appear through video conferencing, such request be considered liberally.

(KISHORE C. SANT) Judge dyb