Bombay High Court
NAYANA NIVRUTTI KOTHALKARversusNIVRUTTI SAKHARAM KOTHALKAR
- Disposal
- Rejected at Admission stage
Holding
The application for transfer under Section 24 CPC is dismissed; no transfer is ordered.
Summary
The wife filed a Section 24 CPC application seeking transfer of a marriage petition and a civil suit from Buldhana to Jalgaon, alleging the 115‑km distance, lack of accompaniment and financial hardship. She also argued that her pending Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (PWDVA) case in Jalgaon warranted transfer of the other proceedings. The court observed that the PWDVA case has no direct nexus with the civil matters and that the wife, being 27 years old, can travel on her own; any financial difficulty can be remedied by ordering the husband to pay travel expenses. Consequently, the court found no sufficient ground to transfer the cases and dismissed the application, while directing the husband to pay Rs 600 per hearing to the wife, to assign both cases to the same court, and to allow video‑conferencing where appropriate.
Issues considered
- Whether the distance and alleged inconvenience justify transfer of the marriage petition and civil suit under Section 24 of the CPC.
- Whether the existence of a PWDVA proceeding in Jalgaon creates a nexus warranting transfer of the other cases.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- Section 24 CPC
- transfer of suit
- jurisdiction
- domestic violence
- convenience of parties
- video conferencing
- travel expense compensation
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:43387
IN THE JUDICATURE OF HIGH COURT AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
7 MISC.CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 137 OF 2026
Nayana Nivrutti Kothalkar
VERSUS
Nivrutti Sakharam Kothalkar
...
Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Jitendra Vijay Patil
Advocate for Respondent : Mr. Amardeep F.Naiknaware a/w Mr. Ravi M.
Bhosle
...
CORAM : ROHIT W. JOSHI, J.
Dated : September 23, 2026
PER COURT :-
1. The present application is filed under Section 24 of the Code of
Civil Procedure seeking transfer of Marriage Petition-A No.89 of 2025
from Family Court Buldhana and Regular Civil Suit No.285 of 2025 from
the Court of the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Buldana, to the
Court of the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Jalgaon.
2. It is the case of the applicant-wife that the distance between
Buldana and Jalgaon is around 115 kilometres. She states that she is
residing at Jalgaon and does not have any responsible person to
accompany her for travelling from Jalgaon to Buldana. It is also stated
that she does not have sufficient means to undertake the journey from
Jalgaon to Buldana. Apart from this, it is contended that the general
convenience of the wife should be considered while dealing with an
application under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
Page 1 of 3
7 MCA 137-2026
3. It is further stated that the applicant-wife has filed a
proceeding under the provisions of the Protection of Women from
Domestic Violence Act, 2005, being PWDVA Application No.279 of
2025, before the Court of the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class,
Jalgaon. On this basis, it is contended that the proceedings filed by
the husband should also be transferred to Jalgaon.
4. It is not in dispute that the proceeding under the Domestic
Violence Act has been filed by the applicant-wife after filing of the
petition for restitution of conjugal rights by the respondent-husband.
The proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act do not have any
direct nexus with the civil suit or the petition for restitution of
conjugal rights filed by the respondent-husband.
5. The distance between Buldana and Jalgaon is around 115
kilometres. The applicant is aged about 27 years and, therefore, can
undertake the journey on her own without being accompanied by
any other person. As regards the financial hardship pleaded by the
applicant, the same can be taken care of by directing the
respondent-husband to pay an appropriate amount towards her
travelling and other incidental expenses whenever she is required to
attend the proceedings at Buldana.
6. In the considered opinion of this Court, no case for transfer of
Page 2 of 3
7 MCA 137-2026
Marriage Petition No.89 of 2025 and Regular Civil Suit No.285 of
2025 is made out. The application is, therefore, rejected.
7. However, having regard to the fact that the applicant-wife
would be required to travel from Jalgaon to Buldana for attending the
proceedings, the respondent-husband shall pay an amount of
Rs.600/- to the applicant-wife on each date on which she personally
attends the hearing of the aforesaid proceedings at Buldana.
8. It is further directed that the Marriage Petition and the Regular
Civil Suit be assigned to the same Court. If possible, both the
proceedings may be posted on the same date, so that the applicant-
wife is not required to travel to Buldana on two different dates for
attending the two proceedings.
9. In the event the applicant - wife makes an application for
appearance through video-conferencing, the same may be
considered favorably and permission to appear through video-
conferencing may be granted on such dates and at such stages as is
deemed appropriate by the concerned Court.
( ROHIT W. JOSHI, J. )
vj gawade/-.
Page 3 of 3
Checking your session…