Bombay High Court
NIKITA ROHIT VAISHNAVversusROHIT SUDARSHAN VAISHNAV
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
The Court declined to order transfer of the restitution of conjugal rights petition and dismissed the application.
Summary
The wife filed a Miscellaneous Civil Application seeking transfer of a restitution of conjugal rights petition from the Family Court in Aurangabad to the Family Court in Dhule, citing a 175‑km distance, financial constraints and lack of accompaniment. She also noted three criminal proceedings pending in Dhule – under Section 498A IPC, Section 125 CrPC and the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act – arguing that transfer would not prejudice the husband. The husband contended that the marriage petition had been pending for about two years, was at an advanced stage with examination‑in‑chief completed, and was likely to conclude within a few more dates, making transfer unnecessary. The Court held that given the advanced stage of the proceedings, transferring the case would be inappropriate and would not alter the stage of the matter. Consequently, the application for transfer was rejected, with the Court indicating that the wife could seek to set aside the ex‑parte order or request video‑conferencing for future appearances.
Issues considered
- Whether a family court petition pending at an advanced stage can be transferred to another family court on the ground of distance and hardship.
- Whether such transfer would cause prejudice to the respondent.
- Whether alternative measures like video‑conferencing are appropriate in lieu of transfer.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- transfer of jurisdiction
- family court
- restitution of conjugal rights
- ex parte order
- video conferencing
- procedural law
- pending criminal proceedings
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:42524
908. MCA 146 of 2026.odt
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO.146/2026
Nikita Rohit Vaishnav
...Versus…
Rohit Sudarshan Vaishnav
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --- -
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders
appearances, Court's orders or directions
and Registrar's orders
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ----- ------------ -
Mr. Shaikh Tousif Saifuddin, Advocate for applicant
Mr. Shaikh Ashraf Patel, Advocate h/f Mr. A.P. Avhad, Advocate for respondent
CORAM : ROHIT W. JOSHI, J.
DATE : 16/09/2026
1. The present Misc. Civil Application is filed seeking
transfer of Petition No.A-78/2024 from the file of learned
Family Court, Aurangabad to the learned Family Court at
Dhule.
2. The Marriage Petition is filed by the
respondent/husband for restitution of conjugal rights. The
applicant/wife is staying at Dhule. It is stated that distance
between Aurangabad to Dhule is around 175 kilometers and it
will be difficult for the wife to attend the proceeding before
the Court at Aurangabad due to financial constraints and also
because there is no suitable person to accompany the wife for
travelling from Dhule to Aurangabad.
3. Apart from this, it is stated that three proceedings
instituted prior in point of time for prosecution of offence
punishable under Section 498 A of Indian Penal Code, for
908. MCA 146 of 2026.odt
2
maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure and another proceeding under the Protection of
Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 are already pending
before the Competent Courts at Dhule and as such no
prejudice will be caused to the husband, if the marriage
petition is also transferred to Dhule.
4. Learned Advocate for the respondent/husband
argues that the marriage petition is pending for a period of
around 2 years and already order to proceed without written
statement of the applicant/wife is passed in the marriage
petition. He contends that examination-in-chief of the husband
is over and now the case is posted for admission of documents
and cross-examination. Learned Advocate for the
respondent/husband states that for the present, the husband
does not intend to examine any other witness. He, therefore,
argues that the matter is likely to be concluded within two to
three dates.
5. Having regard to the advanced stage of the
proceedings, in the considered opinion of this Court, it will not
be appropriate to direct transfer of proceedings from
Aurangabad to Dhule. It must be stated that even if the
proceeding is transferred, as prayed, the stage of proceeding
will not alter.
6. In view of the aforesaid, no case is made out for
ordering transfer of case from Aurangabad to Dhule. The Misc.
Civil Application is, therefore, rejected.
908. MCA 146 of 2026.odt
3
7. It will be open for the applicant/wife to move
appropriate application for setting aside ex parte order, and
permission to file written statement, if she so desires.
8. In the event the applicant/wife makes an
application for appearance through Video-Conferencing, the
same may be considered favourably and permission to appear
through Video-Conferencing may be granted on such dates
and at such stages as is deemed appropriate by the learned
Family Court.
(ROHIT W. JOSHI, J.)
Gawade
Checking your session…