Bombay High Court

Rama Bipin PandeyversusBipin Prabhakar Pandey

Decided: 25 June 2026
Disposal: Allowed
Bench: RAJESH S PATIL

Holding

The marriage petition is to be transferred from CJSD Vasai to CJSD Kalyan.

Summary

The wife, Rama Bipin Pandey, applied to transfer her divorce proceedings from the CJSD Vasai to the CJSD Kalyan, arguing that the long journey from Washim and lack of a male escort made attendance at Vasai impracticable, especially as she also faces domestic‑violence and Section 498A criminal matters. The husband opposed, contending that the distance between Vasai and Kalyan is negligible and that the transfer would inconvenience him, who is in service. The court examined the Supreme Court’s guidance in N.C.V. Aishwarya v. A.S. Sarvana Karthik Sha, which mandates that a wife’s convenience be a primary consideration in matrimonial transfers under Section 24 of the CPC. It observed that the husband already travels to Shahapur for related proceedings, so the transfer would not impose undue hardship on him. Accordingly, the court allowed the transfer, ordering the marriage petition to be moved to CJSD Kalyan within four weeks and directing the order to be communicated to the relevant registrars.

Issues considered

Whether the transfer of the divorce proceedings from CJSD Vasai to CJSD Kalyan is justified under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure considering the parties' convenience.
Whether the wife’s difficulty in traveling and lack of escort outweigh the husband’s claim of inconvenience.
Whether the Supreme Court precedent requiring consideration of the wife’s economic and social circumstances applies to the present case.

Legislation cited

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. 24
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 498A

Subjects

transfer of suit
matrimonial law
divorce
Section 24 CPC
wife's convenience
Section 498A IPC
domestic violence
civil appellate jurisdiction

Judgment

                                                       31. MCA 86-2026.doc


           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                   CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

         MISCELLANEOUS CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 86 OF 2026

Rama Bipin Pandey                                       ..Applicant

        Versus

Bipin Prabhakar Pandey                                  ..Respondent

Mr. Jyotiram S. Yadav, Advocate, for the Applicant
Ms. Mekhala More i/b. Mr. Anurag Dubey, Advocates, for the
Respondent

                          CORAM : RAJESH S. PATIL, J.

                          DATE       : 25 JUNE, 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 C.J.S.D., Vasai to the C.J.S.D., Kalyan.

2.      It is the case of the Applicant that the Applicant is staying at

Washim and she is a home-maker. She has already filed DV proceedings

and complaint under Section 498 A of the Indian Penal Code before the

Shahapur Court Police Station. It is difficult for her to travel from

Washim to Vasai to attend the Court proceedings as she will have to

travel from Central line Washim to Dadar and thereafter from Dadar

via Western line to Vasai. The entire journey will take around 3-4 hours

and the same time would be required to return back home. There is no

Anand                            1 of 4
                                                        31. MCA 86-2026.doc

male member in her family who could accompany her to attend the

Court proceedings at Vasai. Hence, if the proceedings are transferred

to Kalyan, it will be convenient for her to attend the Court proceedings.

She was not able to attend the Court proceedings at Vasai filed by her

husband. Hence, the Respondent has preferred an Application for

ex-parte hearing.

3.      Ms. More, learned Counsel for the Respondent – husband has

opposed this Application for transfer. She submits that the distance

between Vasai and Kalyan is not so far hence, the Applicant – wife can

attend the Court proceedings at Vasai. She submits that in any case, the

Applicant – wife is a home maker therefore, she will not have to take

leave from the office to attend the Court proceeding, whereas the

Respondent is in service. Therefore, if the proceeding is transferred

from Vasai to Kalyan, it would be difficult for him to attend the Court

proceeding.

4.      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

Anand                           2 of 4
                                                         31. MCA 86-2026.doc

        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)

5.      Considering the law as laid down by the Supreme Court in the

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

the Respondent – husband travels to Shahapur to attend the D. V.

proceeding and the proceeding filed under Section 498A of the Indian

Penal Code, 1860 pending before the J.M.F.C., Shahapur, it will not be

difficult for him to attend one more proceeding at Shahapur, District –

Thane. Hence, the MCA requires to be allowed.

6.      The Miscellaneous Civil Application stands allowed in terms of

prayer clause (b).

7.      The proceeding, being the Marriage Petition No. 809 of 2025

pending before the C.J.S.D., Vasai be transferred to the C.J.S.D., Kalyan

within a period of four weeks from today.

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

the Order passed today to the C.J.S.D., Vasai, who is hearing the


Anand                            3 of 4
                                                        31. MCA 86-2026.doc

matrimonial proceedings.

9.      The Registrar (Judicial – I) is hereby directed to communicate

the Order passed today to the Registrar of the C.J.S.D., Vasai by E-mail.



                                                   (RAJESH S. PATIL, J.)




Anand                           4 of 4

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…