PALLAVI GANESH GANGURDEversusGANESH SANJAY GANGAURDE

                                                                             905. MCA 65-2026.doc


                                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                         CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                               MISCELLANEOUS CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 65 OF 2026

                      Pallavi Ganesh Gangurde                                  ..Applicant

ANAND                           Versus
SUDHAKAR
SUDAME
Digitally signed by
                      Ganesh Sanjay Gangurde                                   ..Respondent
ANAND SUDHAKAR
SUDAME
Date: 2026.04.16
19:51:47 +0530        Mr. Parag S. Mishra, Advocate, for the Applicant
                      Mr. Digvijay A. Patil, Advocate, for the Respondent

                                                CORAM : RAJESH S. PATIL, J.

                                                DATE       : 10.04.2026
                      P. C.

                      1.      By the present transfer Application, the Applicant – wife of the

                      Respondent is seeking transfer of the divorce proceedings filed by the

                      Respondent-husband before the Family Court at Nashik, to the Family

                      Court at Bandra, Mumbai.

                      2.      It is the case of the Applicant that she is staying at Kandivali,

                      Mumbai and is a home-maker. She is staying with her parents and 7

                      years old daughter, who is studying in a school at Kandivali, Mumbai.

                      3.      The Respondent is into the field of Interior Design and is not

                      paying any maintenance to the Applicant or to the daughter.

                      4.      Hence, learned Counsel for the Applicant prays that the present

                      Application may be allowed.


                      Anand                            1 of 4
                                                          905. MCA 65-2026.doc

5.      Learned   Counsel    for    the     Respondent   submits   that   the

Respondent is a job less. Hence, he cannot make any statement with

regard to payment of interim maintenance without prejudice to the

rights and contentions of both the parties as of date.

6.      He submits that the divorce proceeding should not be transferred

from Nasik as it will be inconvenient for the Respondent to attend the

Court proceeding at Nasik.

7.      The Supreme Court in the case of N. C. V. Aishwarya vs. A. S.

Sarvana Karthik Sha, reported in 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1199 has held

that while deciding transfer proceedings, convenience of the wife has

to be taken into consideration. Paragraph 9 of the said Judgment 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 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)


Anand                              2 of 4
                                                       905. MCA 65-2026.doc

8.      Considering the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case

of N. C. V. Aishwarya (supra) and facts of the present case that the

Applicant – wife is staying with her parents at Kandivali, Mumbai with

her 7 years old daughter, who is studying in a school at Kandivali,

Mumbai as also the fact that the Applicant is not earning and is a

home-maker and the Respondent is in the field of interior design and is

not willing to pay any maintenance to the Applicant and their daughter

unless and until there is an order passed by this Court to that effect,

according to me, a case is made out to allow the Application.

9.      The Miscellaneous Civil Application stands allowed in terms of

prayer clause (a).

9.1     The proceeding, being the Marriage Petition No. A-770 of 2025

pending before the Family Court, Nashik be transferred to the Family

Court, Bandra, Mumbai within a period of four weeks from today.

9.2     Both the learned Counsel, on instructions of their clients submit

that parties are free to approach the Main Mediation Centre, High

Court, Bombay in order to resolve the matrimonial dispute between the

parties. If the parties approached the Main Mediation Centre, High

Court, Bombay, the Secretary of the Main Mediation Centre to appoint

a trained mediator in order to resolve the matrimonial dispute between

the parties.


Anand                           3 of 4
                                                       905. MCA 65-2026.doc

10.     Learned Counsel for the Applicant is hereby directed to convey

the order passed today to the Family Court, Nashik who is hearing the

matrimonial proceedings and file Affidavit to that effect within a period

of two weeks from today.

11.     Similarly, Registrar (Judicial – I) is hereby directed to

communicate the order passed today to the Registrar of the Family

Court, Nashik by E-mail.



                                                  (RAJESH S. PATIL, J.)




Anand                          4 of 4