Smt. Sushma Shrinivas Manthalkar v. Shrinivas Chandrakant Manthalkar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION MISCELLANEOUS CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 359 OF 2025 Sushma Shrinivas Manthalkar ..Applicant

Versus

ANAND SUDHAKAR SUDAME Shrinivas Chandrakant Manthalkar ..Respondent Mr. Chaitanya P. Dixit i/b. Mr. Dhananjay K. Bhosale, Advocates, for the Applicant by ANAND SUDHAKAR SUDAME Date: 2026.02.13 18:18:56 +0530 CORAM : RAJESH S. PATIL, J.

DATE : 11.02.2026 P. C.

1.

Office remarks show that service of MCA on the Respondent has been refused.

2.

An Affidavit of service has been filed to show that a packet addressed to the Respondent has returned with postal remarks "unclaimed".

3.

None appears for the Respondent when the matter is called out. It seems that the Respondent is not interested in pursuing the present Application. Hence, I have proceeded further with the hearing of the proceeding.

4.

By the present transfer Application, the Applicant, who is the wife of the Respondent is seeking transfer of the Application filed for

restitution of conjugal rights pending before the learned Family Court, Solapur to the learned Family Court, Pune.

5.

It is the case of the Applicant that she is staying at Pune and Solapur is around 250 Km away from Pune. Time to reach from Solapur to Pune is around 5-6 hours. The Applicant is staying with her parents and two daughters aged 13 and 17 years. It is extremely difficult for the Applicant to travel from Pune to Solapur to attend the Court proceeding and return back on the same day. There is no male member in the family of the Applicant to accompany her to attend the Court proceeding. Therefore, the proceeding be transferred from the learned Family Court, Solapur to the learned Family Court, Pune for convenience of the Applicant.

6.

The Supreme Court in the case of N. C. V. Aishwarya vs. A. S. Sarvana Karthik Sha, reported in 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1199 has held that while deciding transfer proceedings, convenience of the wife has to be taken into consideration. Paragraph 9 of the said Judgment reads as under :- "9.

The cardinal principle for exercise of power under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure is that the ends of justice should demand transfer of the suit, appeal or other proceeding. In matrimonial matters, wherever Courts are called upon to consider the plea of transfer, the Courts have to take into consideration the economic soundness of both the parties, the social strata of the spouses and their behavioural pattern, their standard of life prior to the

marriage and subsequent thereto and the circumstances of both the parties in eking out their livelihood and under whose protective umbrella they are seeking their sustenance to life. Given the prevailing socio-economic paradigm in the Indian society, generally, it is the wife's convenience which must be looked at while considering transfer."

(emphasis supplied) 7.

Considering the law as laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of N. C. V. Aishwarya (Supra) and facts of the present case, I am convinced that the Application requires to be allowed. 8.

The Miscellaneous Civil Application stands allowed in terms of prayer clause (a).

9.

The proceeding, being Petition A No. 266/2023 pending before the learned Family Court, Solapur be transferred to the learned Family Court, Pune within a period of four weeks from today. 10.

Similarly, Registrar (Judicial-I) is hereby directed to communicate the order passed today to the Registrar of the Family Court, Solapur by Email.

(RAJESH S. PATIL, J.)