Bombay High Court
Pooja GandhiversusDevang Gandhi
- Decided
- Disposal
- Allowed
- Bench
- RAJESH S PATIL
Holding
Considering the wife’s safety and convenience, the court held that the divorce petition must be transferred to the Family Court, Bandra.
Summary
The applicant, wife of the respondent, filed a transfer application seeking to move the divorce petition pending in the Family Court, Belapur, to the Family Court, Bandra, on grounds of personal safety and convenience. She alleges that the respondent, a politically influential person, has lodged false complaints against her and that she fears for her life if she appears in Belapur, where the respondent resides. The respondent opposed, claiming the applicant still lives in the same flat in Navi Mumbai despite the license ending, arguing transfer would inconvenience both parties. The court, relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in N.C.V. Aishwarya v. A.S. Sarvana Karthik Sha, emphasized the paramount importance of the wife’s convenience in matrimonial matters and found the applicant’s fears credible. Consequently, the court allowed the transfer, directing that the divorce petition be moved to the Family Court, Bandra within four weeks.
Issues considered
- Whether the divorce petition should be transferred to another family court on account of the wife’s safety and convenience.
- Whether the applicant’s residence and the termination of the leave‑and‑license agreement affect jurisdiction.
- Whether alleged political influence and fear for life constitute sufficient grounds for transfer under Section 24 of the CPC.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- divorce
- transfer of suit
- family court
- wife’s convenience
- Section 24 CPC
- domestic violence
- political influence
- safety
Judgment
33. MCA 66-2026.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
MISCELLANEOUS CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 66 OF 2026
Pooja Devang Gandhi ..Applicant
Versus
Devang Kantilal Gandhi ..Respondent
ANAND
SUDHAKAR
SUDAME Mr. Samarth Moray a/w. Ms. Vandana Shah, Ms. Pallavi Biranje,
Digitally signed by
ANAND SUDHAKAR
Mr. Mannesh Gawali, Mr. Vinay Kumar Vaishya, Ms. Shivani Jhadhav
SUDAME
Date: 2026.07.31 i/b. Ms. Shivani Shinde, Advocates, for the Applicant
10:49:30 +0530
Ms. Panthi Desai i/b. M. P. Vashi & Associates, Advocates, for the
Respondent
CORAM : RAJESH S. PATIL, J.
DATE : 27 JULY, 2026
P. C.
1. By the present transfer Application, the Applicant, who is the
wife of the Respondent is seeking transfer of the Divorce Petition filed
by the Respondent – husband before the Family Court, Belapur, Navi
Mumbai to the Family Court, Bandra, Mumbai.
2. It is the case of the Applicant that from December, 2024, she is
residing with her mother, who is 81 years old at Chembur, Mumbai.
Her Aadhar Card of September, 2025 mentions her address at
Chembur, Mumbai. The Respondent is politically influenced person and
he has lodged false complaints against the Applicant. In these
circumstances, the Applicant fears traveling to the Family Court,
Anand 1 of 4
33. MCA 66-2026.doc
Belapur, Navi Mumbai. She fears for her life and safety because the
Respondent resides nearby and has political influence. Therefore, she
does not wish to travel to Belapur which is around 35 Km from her
house. She has not filed any proceedings against the Respondent under
the Domestic Violence Act or Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code,
1860, nor has she filed any other Criminal complaint. She is a
homemaker.
3. Ms. Desai, learned Counsel for the Respondent opposes this
Application on the ground that although the flat in which the Applicant
resides the license period has ended in January 2026, the Applicant
still lives in the same flat at Navi Mumbai. The neighbours have also
informed the Respondent that the Applicant continues to reside in the
same flat at Navi Mumbai. Communication in this regard has been filed
in the present proceeding. Therefore, it will be inconvenient for both
parties, if the proceedings are continued at the Family Court, Belapur,
Navi Mumbai.
4. I have heard learned Counsel for the respective parties. I have
also gone through the documents on record produced by them.
5. 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
Anand 2 of 4
33. MCA 66-2026.doc
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)
6. Considering the law as laid down by the Supreme Court in the
case of N. C. V. Aishwarya (supra) and the fact that the Applicant’s
Aadhar card mentions an address in Chembur, Mumbai and that the
Leave and License Agreement for Navi Mumbai flat which was in the
Respondent's name, the license ended in January 2026. The Applicant’s
mother is 81 years old, there is no dispute about the same. Although
the Respondent filed for divorce, the Applicant did not file any counter
complaints. Under these circumstances, I find no reason to disbelieve
the Applicant’s statements in the transfer Application. She has also
specifically mentioned that the Respondent has political connection
Anand 3 of 4
33. MCA 66-2026.doc
and that she fears for her life to attend Court proceedings in Belapur,
where the Respondent resides. Furthermore, apart from the divorce
proceedings, the Respondent has allegedly filed false complaints
against the Applicant.
7. In my view, a case is made out to allow the Miscellaneous Civil
Application.
8. The Miscellaneous Civil Application stands allowed in terms of
prayer clause (a).
8.1 The proceeding, being the Marriage Petition No. 123 of 2025
pending before the Family Court, Belapur, Navi Mumbai be transferred
to the Family Court, Bandra, Mumbai within a period of four weeks
from today.
9. Learned Counsel for the Applicant is hereby permitted to convey
the Order passed today to the Family Court, Belapur, Navi Mumbai.
10. The Registrar (Judicial – I) is hereby directed to communicate
the Order passed today to the Registrar of the Family Court, Belapur,
Navi Mumbai by E-mail.
(RAJESH S. PATIL, J.)
Anand 4 of 4
Checking your session…