Bombay High Court
Shamal Aditya TarangeversusAditya Ishwar Tarange
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- ABHAY MANTRI
Holding
The application for transfer of the divorce proceedings is dismissed as bereft of merit.
Summary
The applicant sought to have divorce proceedings pending before the Family Court in Pune transferred to the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Rahata, or any other court within Ahmednagar district. The court noted that the applicant had concealed the material fact that she resides and works in Pune, despite an affidavit by the respondent stating the same, and that she had not filed a rejoinder. The applicant argued that she works from home and only travels to Pune a few times a week, but the court found that this did not create any difficulty in attending the Pune court. The presence of unrelated criminal and domestic‑violence cases in Rahata was held not to justify a transfer when the Family Court in Pune is competent. Consequently, the application was found to be without merit and dismissed.
Issues considered
- Whether the divorce proceedings pending before the Family Court, Pune, can be transferred to the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Rahata.
- Whether the applicant's residence and place of employment affect the jurisdiction for the divorce suit.
- Whether the pendency of proceedings under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act and IPC Section 498‑A in Rahata warrants transfer of the divorce suit.
- Whether the applicant's failure to disclose her true residence constitutes lack of clean hands justifying dismissal.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- divorce
- transfer of suit
- jurisdiction
- family court
- clean hands
- residence
- employment
- Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act
- IPC 498-A
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:30228
914.MCA.119.2026.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
MISCELLANEOUS CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 119 OF 2026
Shamal Aditya Tarange ...Applicant
Versus
Aditya Ishwar Tarange ...Respondent
***
Mr. Shailesh Sudhakar Chapalgaonkar, Advocate for the Applicant.
Mr. P. P. More h/f Mr. Pathade Kedar Ashok, Advocate for the Respondent.
***
CORAM : ABHAY J. MANTRI, J.
DATE : JULY 22, 2026
PER COURT :
1. The Applicant seeks transfer of the divorce proceedings bearing
Petition No. A-116 of 2026, pending before the learned Family Court, Pune,
to the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Rahata, or to any other Court
within the territorial jurisdiction of Ahmednagar District.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
3. Having heard the rival contentions of the parties, at the outset, it
appears that the Applicant has not approached this Court with clean hands
and has suppressed the material fact that she is employed with a company at
Pune and is residing at Pune. However, she has intentionally pleaded that she
is residing at Rahata and works from home. In fact, the Respondent, by filing
Shrikant Malani Page 1 of 3
914.MCA.119.2026.odt
an Affidavit-in-Reply, has specifically averred in paragraph No.4 that “ the
Applicant is regularly residing at Pune and carrying out her employment
therefrom”. The said averment has not been controverted nor denied by the
Applicant by filing a Rejoinder. Thus, the non-filing of the Rejoinder leads to
the inference that the Applicant is residing at Pune and carrying out her
employment therefrom. On this ground alone, the Application deserves to be
rejected.
4. Apart from that, during arguments, the learned counsel for the
Applicant fairly submitted that it is correct that the Applicant is employed
with a company at Pune. However, he submitted that she works from home
and is required to attend the office twice or thrice in a week. If that being so,
the Applicant is already travelling to Pune to attend her employment and,
therefore, she can conveniently attend the proceedings before the learned
Family Court, Pune. It cannot be said that it is difficult for her to attend the
proceedings. In such circumstances, in my view, there is no necessity to
transfer the proceedings from the learned Family Court, Pune, to the learned
Civil Judge, Senior Division, Rahata.
5. Moreover, the Applicant contends that the proceedings under the
Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act and the proceedings under
Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code are pending at Rahata. Merely
because those proceedings are pending at Rahata cannot be a ground to
Shrikant Malani Page 2 of 3
914.MCA.119.2026.odt
transfer the present proceedings from the learned Family Court, Pune, to the
learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Rahata, particularly when the learned
Family Court, Pune, is competent to try and entertain proceedings. Further,
since the Applicant is admittedly required to visit Pune twice or thrice in a
week for her employment, as such, no case is made out for transfer of the
proceedings.
6. Consequently, the Application, being bereft of merits, stands
dismissed.
7. Inform the concerned Court accordingly.
(ABHAY J. MANTRI, J.)
Shrikant Malani Page 3 of 3
Checking your session…