Pamel Sarkar Ghosh@Pamel Ghosh Sarkar v. Sovan Sarkar

01.02.2023 mb In the High Court at Calcutta In the Circuit Bench at Jalpaiguri C.O No. 114 of 2022 Smt. Pamel (Sarkar) Ghosh @ Smt. Pamel Ghosh (Sarkar) -Vs.- Sovan Sarkar Ms. Suman Sehanabis (Mandal) ... for the petitioner Mr. Subhasish Misra ... for the opposite party Affidavit of service filed in Court today be kept on record.

Learned counsel for the petitioner-wife contends that the petitioner-wife has a minor daughter, who is studying in a junior school and that the petitioner's parents are aged and ailing. As such, it is contended that it is difficult for the petitioner to attend the matrimonial suit filed by her husband-opposite party, by going to Dinhata and attending court there.

That apart, it is submitted that the petitioner-wife has initiated two proceedings, respectively under Section 125 and 498A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, before court(s) in Cooch Behar. Hence, the opposite party-husband has to attend those proceedings in Cooch Behar in any event.

Learned counsel appearing for the opposite party-husband submits that the

distance between the two places, that is, Dinhata and Cooch Behar, is minimal and it takes only thirty minutes to move between the two places. That apart, it is submitted that no cogent ground has been disclosed in the present petition for transferring the case of the husband to Cooch Behar.

Perused the allegations made in the present petition under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

It is evident that the distance between the two places, that is, Dinhata and Cooch Behar is minimal. Hence, no useful purpose will be served if the matter is transferred from Dinhata to Cooch Behar. The mere inconvenience cited by the petitioner, in any event, will be with her wherever she goes to contest the suit. Moreover, mere institution of two criminal proceedings in Cooch Behar does not benefit the petitioner in support of the present application for transfer, since the dates in the criminal cases might not correspond with the dates of the matrimonial suit, which are pending in different jurisdictions before different courts.

As such, I do not find any cogent material to transfer the matrimonial suit from Dinhata to Cooch Behar.

Accordingly, C.O No. 114 of 2022 is dismissed without, however, any order as to costs.

Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be made available to the parties upon compliance of all requisite formalities.

(Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J.)