YOGINI UMESH CHIVHANE Vs. UMESH UTTAMRAO CHIVHANE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard finally with the consent of the parties.

(2.) THE learned Counsel for the applicant/wife contended that the wife has filed Hindu Marriage Petition No. 27 of 2003 for divorce at Kelapur on 30-7-2003 whereas the non-applicant/husband has filed Hindu Marriage petition No. 68 of 2003 on 29-7-2003 in the Court of Civil Judge, Sr. Dn. , wardha. He contended that in order to avoid conflicting decisions, it is desirable that both the petitions should be tried together. He further contended that it would be convenient for the wife to attend the Court at Kelapur. The wife has also no independent source of income for maintaining herself. Therefore, in the circumstances, the petition for divorce filed by the husband be transferred from Wardha to Kelapur. In support of his contentions he relied on the Single Judge's decision of this Court in (Anisha Sanjay Hinduja v. Sanjay Shrichand Hinduja), 2003 (Supp.) Bom. C. R. 802 : 2000 (3) Mh. L. J. 139, and the two decisions of Apex Court in (Sumita Singh v. Kumar Sanjay and another), A. I. R. 2002 S. C. 396, and in the case of (Guda Vijayalakshmi v. Guda Ramchandra Sekhara Sastry), A. I. R. 1981 S. C. 1143.

(3.) MR. Modak, learned Counsel, for the husband contended that by virtue of the powers under section 21-A of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short the Act) if the petitions are to be transferred then the procedure laid down under sub-section (3) of section 21-A of the Act has to be followed. He contended that the petition for divorce has been filed by the husband in the Court of Civil Judge, Sr. Dn. , Wardha on 29-7-2003 and since the petition is filed earlier in point of time, the petition for divorce filed by the wife on the subsequent date. i. e. on 30-7-2003, can be transferred to the Court at Wardha as per the mandate of sub-section 2 (b) of section 21-A of the Act.