Bombay High Court
Priyanka Ravindra LadversusVishal Bhisale alias Shyam Ravikant Bhisale
- Decided
- Disposal
- Allowed
- Bench
- RAJESH S PATIL
Holding
The marriage petition pending before the CJSD, Sindhudurg is to be transferred to the Family Court at Bandra, Mumbai.
Summary
The applicant, a wife residing in Mumbai with her parents and an autistic six‑year‑old daughter, filed a miscellaneous civil application seeking transfer of a marriage petition pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sindhudurg, to the Family Court at Bandra. The husband had not paid maintenance, and the applicant argued that the 451 km distance and her need to care for a special child made attending proceedings in Sindhudurg impracticable. The court considered the Supreme Court’s decision in N.C.V. Aishwarya v. A.S. Saravana Karthik, which emphasizes the wife’s convenience in transfer applications under Section 24 of the CPC. Relying on that precedent and the factual hardship, the judge held that justice required the transfer. Consequently, the application was allowed and the marriage petition was ordered to be transferred to the Family Court, Bandra within four weeks.
Issues considered
- Whether the marriage petition pending before the CJSD, Sindhudurg should be transferred to the Family Court at Bandra under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
- Whether the wife’s convenience and hardship, given her special‑needs child and distance, warrant such a transfer.
Legislation cited
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. 24
Subjects
- transfer of suit
- Section 24 CPC
- wife's convenience
- maintenance
- special child
- family court jurisdiction
- marriage petition
Judgment
2026:BHC-AS:26172
Diksha Rane 27 MCA 459 2025.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 459/2025
Priyanka Ravindra Lad ..APPLICANT
VS
Vishal Bhisale alias Shyam Ravikant Bhisale ..RESPONDENT
------------
Adv. Tejashree Shrikant Navghan for the applicant.
None for the respondent.
------------
CORAM : RAJESH S. PATIL, J.
DATE : 25 JUNE 2026.
P.C. :
1) By the present transfer application, the applicant-wife is
seeking transfer of the Marriage Petition filed by the respondent-
husband before the CJSD, Sindhudurg to the Family Court at Bandra.
2) Office remark shows that the respondent has been served.
Learned counsel for the applicant has tendered affidavit of service
dated 6 February 2026 which shows that the respondent has been
served through speed-post.
2.1) When the matter was called out, the respondent is not
represented by any advocate. Even on an earlier occasion, the
respondent chose not to remain present. It seems that the respondent
is avoiding to attend the present proceeding.
3) It is the case of the applicant-wife that she is staying at
Andheri, Mumbai along with her parents and her six years old
1
Diksha Rane 27 MCA 459 2025.doc
daughter who suffers from Autism Spectrum Disorder. The
respondent is not paying any maintenance to the applicant or to the
daughter. The applicant has to bear expenses of medical as well as of
school for daughter and the daughter has also to attend special
sessions as the daughter is a special child. The distance between
Mumbai and Sindhudurg is around 451 kms. It would be difficult for
her to attend the Court proceedings at Sindhudurg and to return back
as she has to take care of her daughter who is a special child.
4) The Supreme Court in the case of N.C.V. Aishwarya Versus
A.S. Saravana Karthik Sha1, wherein the Supreme Court states that it
is the convenience of the wife which has to be taken into
consideration while dealing with the transfer proceeding. Paragraph
9 of the said decision reads as under:-
9. The cardinal principle for exercise of power under Section 24 of the
Code of Civil Procedure is that the ends of justice should demand the
transfer of the suit, appeal or other proceeding. In matrimonial
matters, wherever Courts are called upon to consider the plea of
transfer, the Courts have to take into consideration the economic
soundness of both the parties, the social strata of the spouses and their
behavioural pattern, their standard of life prior to the marriage and
subsequent thereto and the circumstances of both the parties in eking
out their livelihood and under whose protective umbrella they are
seeking their sustenance to life. Given the prevailing socio-economic
paradigm in the Indian society, generally, it is the wife’s convenience
which must be looked at while considering transfer.
(Emphasis supplied)
1 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1199.
2
Diksha Rane 27 MCA 459 2025.doc
5) Considering the fact that the distance between Mumbai and
Sindhudurg is around 451 kms., and the applicant has to take care of
her daughter who is a special child and considering the law as laid
down by the Supreme Court in the case of N.C.V. Aishwarya (supra), I
am convinced that the present MCA requires to be allowed.
6) The MCA stands allowed in terms of prayer clause (b).
6.1) The proceedings of Marriage Petition No.250 of 2025,
pending before the CJSD, Sindhudurg, be transferred to the Family
Court at Bandra, Mumbai, within a period of four weeks from today.
7) Learned counsel for the applicant is hereby permitted to
convey the order passed today to the CJSD, Sindhudurg.
8) Similarly, Registrar (Judicial-I) is hereby directed to
communicate the order passed today to the Registrar of the CJSD,
Sindhudurg.
9) The MCA stands disposed of accordingly.
10) All concerned to act on an authenticated copy of this order.
(Rajesh S. Patil, J.)
3
Signed by: Diksha Rane
Designation: PS To Honourable Judge
Date: 25/06/2026 18:56:07
Checking your session…