Smt Yashoda Alias Laxmi W/O Nagaraja Davanageri v. Sri Nagaraja S/O Veerabadrappa Davanageri

NC:(2025:KHC-D:17678( CP(No.(100232(of(2025( ( , ,,HC-KAR( ( ( IN(THE(HIGH(COURT(OF(KARNATAKA,AT(DHARWAD(

THDATED(THIS(THE(9 (DAY(OF(DECEMBER,(2025(

BEFORE( THE(HON'BLE(MR.(JUSTICE(C(M(JOSHI(

CIVIL(PETITION(NO.100232(OF(2025((

BETWEEN:(( ( SMT.,YASHODA,@,LAXMI,, W/O.,NAGARAJA,DAVANAGERE,, AGE:,25,YEARS,,OCC.,HOUSEHOLD,WORK,, R/O.,RANEBENNURU,,TQ.,RANEBENNURU,,, DIST.,HAVERI,,

PRESENT,AT,HULLUR,VILLAGE,,, TQ.,LAXMESHWARA,,DIST.,GADAG-582116., …PETITIONER, , (BY,SRI.,KOLIWAD,SHARANAPPA,SHIVAMOORTEPPA,,ADVOCATE),

, AND:( ( SRI.,NAGARAJA,S/O.,VEERABADRAPPA,DAVANAGERI,, AGE:,34,YEARS,,OCC.,DRIVER/COOLIE,,

R/O.,KOTE,ROAD,,NEAR,RAM,MANDIRA,TEMPLE,, YASHAVANT (NEAR,SHRI,VEERABADRESHWAR,KALYANA,MANTAPA),NARAYANKAR RANEBENNUR,,TQ.,RANEBENNURU,,DIST.,HAVERI,,, Digitallytisignedtiby YASHAVANT PHONE,NO.9880094423,,PIN-581115., NARAYANKAR Date:02025.12.12 …RESPONDENT, 11:50:380+0530 , (RESPONDENT,NOTICE,SERVED), , , THIS,CIVIL,PETITION,IS,FILED,U/SEC.24,OF,CPC,,PRAYING,TO, PASS, AN, ORDER, TRANSFERRING, THE, PROCEEDINGS, IN, MC, STNO.26/2024,IN,COURT,OF,1 ,ADDL.,SENIOR,CIVIL,JUDGE,AND,JMFC, RANEBENNUR,TO,SENIOR,CIVIL,JUDGE,AND,JMFC,LAXMESHWAR,,IN, THE,INTEREST,OF,JUSTICE., , , THIS,PETITION,,COMING,ON,FOR,ADMISSION,THIS,DAY,,ORDER, WAS,MADE,THEREIN,AS,UNDER:,

ORAL ORDER

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C M JOSHI)

Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.

¶2The respondent is the husband of the petitioner.

¶3The petitioner is seeking transfer of M.C.No.26/2024 pending before the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Ranebennur to Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Laxmeshwar.

¶4Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the marriage of the petitioner and respondent had solemnized on 26.12.2021 and thereafter, the relationship between the petitioner and the respondent was not cordial and as such, the petitioner started staying at her parents' house at Hullur of Laxmeshwara taluk. It is contended that the respondent has filed M.C.No.26/2024 before Prl. Senior Civil Judge, Ranebennur, seeking divorce.

¶5It is further submitted that the petitioner has to travel from her village to Laxmeshwar and from there to Ranebennur to conduct her case. It is submitted that the parents

of the petitioner are also old aged and therefore, they cannot accompany the petitioner to Ranebennur. It is contended that the respondent had threatened the petitioner not to come to Ranebennur and therefore, she is constrained to file this petition.

¶6The respondent has not appeared despite service of notice.

¶7Considering the grievance of the petitioner, which is not controverted, it is a fit case where the petition deserves to be allowed.

¶8This Court in the case of Smt. M. V. Rekha V/s. Sri Sathya @ Suraj1 at Paragraph No.15 has held as hereunder: "The cardinal principle for exercise of power under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure is that ends of justice demand the 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 either of the parties, the social strata of the

1 ILR 2010 KAR 5407

spouses and behavioural pattern, their standard of life antecedent to marriage and subsequent thereon and the circumstances of either of the parties in eking out their livelihood and under whose protective umbrella they are seeking their sustenance to life. Generally, it is the wife's convenience which must be looked at while considering transfer. Further, when two proceedings in different Courts which raise common question of fact and law and when the decisions are interdependent, it is desirable that they should be tried together by the same Judge so as to avoid multiplicity in trial of the same issues and conflict of decisions (See Smt.NandaKishori v. S.B.Shiua Prakash AIR 1993 Kar 87, Sumita Singh v. Kumar Sanjay and Anr. AIR 2002 SC 396 and Smt.Swarna Gouri v. Sri Vinayak Pujar ILR 2007 Kar 4561)."

(emphasis supplied)

¶9Therefore, the petition deserves to be allowed and hence, the following: ORDER i. The petition is allowed. ii. The M.C.No.26/2024 pending before the Prl. Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Ranebennur is

hereby withdrawn and transferred to the Court of learned Senior Civil Judge, Laxmeshwar for disposal in accordance with law. iii. The transferor Court may fix the date of appearance of the parties before the transferee Court at the convenience of the parties. iv. Intimate both the Courts accordingly.

SD/- (C M JOSHI) JUDGE

RKM CT:PA LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 36