Bombay High Court
Khushboo Kamlesh TardejaversusKamlesh Vijay Tardeja
- Disposal
- Rejected at Admission stage
Holding
The transfer application is rejected as no sufficient ground exists to relocate the family court petition.
Summary
The applicant-wife filed an application under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking to transfer Petition No. A‑405 of 2025 from the Family Court at Amravati to the Family Court at Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar, alleging that the 300 km distance would cause financial hardship. She relied on a prior transfer order in MCA No. 272 of 2023, where a similar petition was transferred after the husband gave no objection. The respondent‑husband opposed, contending that the wife does not reside in Sambhajinagar but in Mumbai, and that both cities are well‑connected by public transport, making travel feasible. The Court noted that the only ground raised was distance, and given the good connectivity and the expressway reducing travel time, found no sufficient reason to order a transfer. Consequently, the transfer application was rejected, but the Court directed that the husband pay the wife’s travel expenses for appearances and allowed the wife to appear via video‑conferencing where appropriate.
Issues considered
- Whether a petition for transfer of a family court case can be granted solely on the basis of distance and alleged financial hardship.
- Whether a prior transfer order in a similar case binds the Court to grant a subsequent transfer.
- Whether the applicant's actual residence in Mumbai affects the propriety of transferring the case to Sambhajinagar.
Legislation cited
- Code of Civil Procedure — s. 24
Subjects
- Family Law
- Transfer of Petition
- Section 24 CPC
- Restitution of Conjugal Rights
- Travel Hardship
- Video Conferencing
- Travel Expenses
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:40196
IN THE JUDICATURE OF HIGH COURT AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
915 MISC.CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 141 OF 2026
Khushboo Kamlesh Tardeja
VERSUS
Kamlesh Vijay Tardeja
...
Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Jagiasi Dinesh Shyamsunder
Advocate for Respondent : Mr. A. A. Joshi h/f Mr. Sharad V Natu
...
CORAM : ROHIT W. JOSHI, J.
Dated : September 02, 2026
PER COURT :-
1. The present application is filed under Section 24 of the Code of
Civil Procedure seeking transfer of Petition No. A-405 of 2025 from the
Family Court, Amravati to the Family Court at Chhatrapati
Sambhajinagar.
2. The contention of the applicant-wife is that the distance between
Amravati and Sambhajinagar is around 300 km and that she does not
have sufficient means to undertake the travel. It is pointed out that, on
an earlier occasion, the respondent-husband had filed a petition for
restitution of conjugal rights at Amravati and, on an application filed by
the applicant-wife, the said proceeding was ordered to be transferred
from Amravati to Sambhajinagar. The learned Advocate contends that
the present application should also be allowed in view of the aforesaid
order allowing the transfer application passed in MCA No. 272 of 2023
on 30th November 2023.
Page 1 of 3
915 MCA 141-2026
3. The learned Advocate for the respondent-husband opposes the
application. He contends that the earlier application was allowed
since the respondent-husband did not oppose the transfer
application and, rather, granted his "no objection" for allowing the
same. As regards the merits, it is stated that the applicant-wife is not
residing at Sambhajinagar as pleaded by her, but at Mumbai, and is
working as a numerologist and tarot card reader. Attention is drawn
to the LinkedIn profile of the applicant-wife in support of this
contention.
4. The learned Advocate further states that, in the earlier
proceedings instituted for restitution of conjugal rights, the
applicant-wife did not attend the proceedings. He contends that,
although the distance between Amravati and Sambhajinagar
(Aurangabad) is around 300 km, both cities are major cities which
are very well connected by modes of public transport. He also
contends that, in view of the recently built expressway, the travel
time between the two cities is around two and a half to three hours
only.
5. It appears that there is substance in the contention of the
respondent-husband that the earlier restitution petition was not
contested by the wife by attending the court proceedings. The only
Page 2 of 3
915 MCA 141-2026
ground that is raised for seeking transfer of the petition is that the
distance between Amravati and Sambhajinagar is around 300 km
and that the wife would face financial and other hardships in
attending the proceedings. Having regard to the fact that both cities
are major cities which are very well connected by modes of public
transport, in the considered opinion of this Court, no case is made
out for seeking transfer of the marriage petition from Amravati to
Sambhajinagar.
6. The Transfer Application is, therefore, rejected. However, on
such dates on which the applicant-wife is required to remain
personally present before the Family Court, Amravati, the husband
shall pay travelling expenses and other expenses to the applicant-
wife.
7. The learned concerned Family Court, Amravati, is requested to
permit the applicant-wife to appear through video conferencing on
such dates and at such stages as may be found appropriate.
( ROHIT W. JOSHI, J. )
vj gawade/-.
Page 3 of 3
Checking your session…