Sou. Ashwini Indrakumar Manmode v. Shri. Indrakumar Shrikrushnarao Manmode
mca344.25.O.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION (TR) NO.344 OF 2025 (Sou. Ashwini Indrakumar Manmode Vs. Indrakumar Shrikrushnarao Manmode) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoramda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's orders.
and Registrar's Orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. V. S. Gokhale, Advocate for Applicant.
None for Respondent.
CORAM: R. M. JOSHI, J.
DATE: 26 th JUNE, 2025.
1.
None for the respondent.
2.
The applicant is wife of respondent. She claims to be dependent on her parents for her survival. She further claims that she had filed Misc. Criminal Case No.36/2024 under the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (for short "DV Act") before Court at Digras, District Yavatmal. She seeks transfer of Marriage Petition No.405/2024 from Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Amravati to Civil Judge, Senior Division, Digras, District Yavatmal.
3.
Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that to and from distance between Amravati and Digras is about 250 km. It is his submission that in any case considering the filing of this proceeding under the provisions of DV Act, the respondent will have to attend the said proceeding at Digras
mca344.25.O.odt and therefore, no prejudice will cause to him if applicant is allowed.
4.
None appearance of the respondent in spite of service of notice indicates that he has no inclination to oppose the application. The contention of the applicant has gone unchallenged. This Court finds substance in the contention of the learned Counsel for the applicant that the respondent would be required to appear before the Court at Digras in the proceeding under the DV Act. As such, no prejudice will be caused to him if the proceeding bearing Marriage Petition No.405/2024 filed before the Civil Judge, Senior Division Amravati is transferred to Civil Judge, Senior Division, Digras, District Yavatmal.
5.
Hence, application stands allowed in terms of prayer clause (i).
6.
In order to ensure that the wife has not harassed her husband by keeping the two proceedings on two different dates it shall be the duty of the wife to ensure that both proceedings are kept for hearing on the same. (R. M. JOSHI, J.) NSN