Bombay High Court
Rachana wo Subhod UkeyversusSubhod Murlidhar Ukey
- Disposal
- APPLICATION ALLOWED
Holding
The petition is to be transferred to the Family Court, Ahilyanagar.
Summary
The wife, Rachana Wo Subhod Ukey, applied to transfer a marriage petition (No. A/86/2026) from the Family Court in Aurangabad to the Family Court in Ahilyanagar, arguing that the husband resides in Ahilyanagar and that their three‑year‑old child is in her custody. The husband opposed, claiming he is posted in Solapur and that his parents live in Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar, the location where the petition was originally filed. The court examined the residence of the parties and the convenience of the minor child, finding no prejudice to the husband if the case were transferred. It held that the child's welfare and the husband's actual residence justified the transfer. Consequently, the application was allowed, ordering the petition to be transferred to Ahilyanagar, with a provision that the husband may appear via video‑conferencing if he so applies.
Issues considered
- Whether the marriage petition should be transferred from the Family Court, Aurangabad to the Family Court, Ahilyanagar on the basis of the parties' residence and the child's welfare.
- Whether the respondent‑husband may be permitted to appear through video‑conferencing.
Subjects
- Family Law
- Transfer of Petition
- Child Custody
- Jurisdiction
- Video Conferencing
- Family Court
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:44655
IN THE JUDICATURE OF HIGH COURT AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
22 MISC.CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 237 OF 2026
Rachana Wo Subhod Ukey
VERSUS
Subhod Murlidhar Ukey
...
Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Yuvraj Sopanrao Choudhari
Advocate for Respondent : Mr. Borkar Dipak Kaduba
...
CORAM : ROHIT W. JOSHI, J.
Dated : September 29, 2026
PER COURT :-
1. The present application is filed seeking transfer of Petition
No.A/86/2026 filed by the respondent-husband before the learned
Family Court, Aurangabad to the learned Family Court, Ahilyanagar.
2. The contention of the applicant is that although the respondent-
husband is staying at Ahilyanagar, the proceeding is filed at
Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar. Apart from this, it is stated that the minor
child of the parties, who is presently 3 years old, is in the custody of
the applicant-wife.
3. Learned Advocate for the respondent-husband opposes the
application stating that the respondent-husband is presently posted at
Solapur and not at Ahilyanagar as contended by the applicant-wife.
Apart from this, he states that the parents of the respondent are
staying at Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar and, therefore, the proceeding
Page 1 of 2
22 MCA 237-2026
was instituted at Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar.
4. Having regard to the fact that the respondent-husband is
admittedly not staying at Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar, in the
considered opinion of this Court, no prejudice will be caused to him if
the Marriage Petition is transferred as prayed by the applicant-wife.
The convenience of the three-year-old child of the parties is also
required to be considered.
5. In view of the aforesaid, the application is allowed. Petition
No.A-86/2026 is ordered to be transferred from the learned Family
Court, Aurangabad to the learned Family Court, Ahilyanagar.
6. In the event the respondent-husband 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, Ahilyanagar.
( ROHIT W. JOSHI, J. )
vj gawade/-.
Page 2 of 2
Checking your session…