Sanjay K. Agrawal, J - (1.) THE question to be considered and decided in this transfer petition is whether in exercise of jurisdiction under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (in short 'CPC') the application for divorce filed by the husband at a later point of time can be transferred to the Court where the application for conjugal rights filed by wife at an early point of time is pending consideration for joint and consolidated trial? This is a transfer petition under Section 24 of the CPC seeking transfer of Case No. 89 -A/2013 (Satish Kumar Rangare v. Smt. Sarita Gajmiye (Rangare), pending in the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Dhamtari to the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Durg.
(2.) THE facts in nutshell, necessary for adjudication of this petition are as under: 2.1 The marriage of Smt. Sarita Rangare applicant herein was solemnized with the non -applicant Satish Rangare on 24/2/2012, and immediately thereafter, in April 2013, the dispute and differences arose between the parties, leading to filing of the application under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for restitution of conjugal rights on 7/5/2013 by applicant/wife before the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Durg, which was registered as Case No. 330 -A/2013, and summon was issued to the non -applicant/husband. On 13/5/2013, the applicant/wife has also filed a complaint against non -applicant/husband for the offence punishable under Section 498 -A of the Indian Penal Code. 2.2 Thereafter, on 12/6/2013, non -applicant/husband filed an application under Section 13(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for divorce before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Dhamtari, which was registered as Case No. 89 -A/2013 (Satish Kumar Rangare v. Smt. Sarita Gajmiye (Rangare), in which, on the same date i.e. 12/6/2013, notice/summon was issued to the wife/applicant herein. It is the case of the applicant herein that the non -applicant/husband has threatened her on 6/7/2013 at Dhamtari, where she has gone for attending the Court proceeding, pursuant to the summon issued to her. The applicant/wife in the aforestated background has filed this instant petition seeking transfer of the case filed by non -applicant/husband before the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Dhamtari to Principal Judge, Family Court, Durg, for hearing and disposal in accordance with law. 2.3 The non -applicant/husband has filed reply, opposing the transfer petition stating inter -alia that no valid and reasonable ground in favour of applicant for presenting instant application for transfer to the Principal Judge, Family Court, Durg is made out and instant application is liable to be rejected. Mr. Jitendra Gupta, learned counsel appearing for the applicant/wife would submit that she has firstly filed an application for restitution of conjugal rights under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Durg, and thereafter, non -applicant/husband as a counter blast has filed application for divorce under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 at Principal Judge, Family Court, Dhamtari to harass the applicant/wife. He would further submit that the application for restitution of conjugal rights and application for divorce be heard analogously in view of provisions contained in Section 21A of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, therefore, application for divorce pending at Principal Judge, Family Court, Dhamtari be transferred to the file of Principal Judge, Family Court, Durg for analogous hearing and disposal in accordance with law.
(3.) REPLYING the contention so raised, Mr. Anup Majumdar, learned counsel appearing for the non -applicant/husband would submit that non -applicant/husband is physically handicapped person and there is no sufficient ground has been raised in the petition for transfer of the divorce processing, therefore, the transfer petition deserves to be rejected.;