⚖️Case Study: Nidhi v. Mohit Kumar
🏛️Court: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
📌Case No.: Transfer Application (Civil) No. 958 of 2025
🧩Corum: Hon’ble Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava, J.
📅Decision Date: 22 September 2026
📜Facts
The wife sought transfer of a divorce petition filed by the husband under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 from the Family Court at Shamli to Muzaffarnagar. She contended that she had no independent source of income, was dependent on her father, and proceedings under Section 144 BNSS were also pending at Muzaffarnagar.
🧩Issue
Whether the wife’s financial dependence and pendency of another proceeding at Muzaffarnagar constituted sufficient grounds for transfer under Section 24 CPC.
📃Contentions
📌Applicant (Wife):
- No independent income and dependent on her father.
- Related proceedings were pending at Muzaffarnagar.
- Requested transfer for convenience.
📌Opposite Party (Husband):
- Shamli and Muzaffarnagar are geographically close.
- No substantial hardship or prejudice was shown to justify transfer.
🔎Court’s Observations
- Section 24 CPC confers a discretionary power that must be exercised in the interest of justice.
- Convenience of the wife is an important factor, but not an absolute ground for transfer.
- The applicant must establish genuine hardship, prejudice, or inability to effectively participate in the proceedings.
- Mere absence of independent income, without proof of substantial difficulty, is insufficient.
- Pendency of proceedings at another place does not automatically justify transfer.
- Comparative convenience alone cannot be the basis for transfer.
📚Reliance on Precedents
The Court referred to:
- Smt. Anjana Rana v. Navin Singh
- Smt. Taruni Tripathi v. Duresh Tripathi
- Sadhna Singh v. Mrityunjay Singh
- Smt. Priyanka Maheshwari v. Vaibhav Maheshwari
These decisions emphasize that transfer applications must be supported by proof of genuine hardship and not merely personal convenience.
📝Decision
The Court held that the applicant failed to demonstrate any substantial hardship or prejudice that would prevent effective participation in the proceedings at Shamli. Accordingly, the transfer application was dismissed.
💡Key Takeaway
✅In matrimonial transfer petitions, the convenience of the wife is a relevant consideration but not a decisive one.
✅Transfer under Section 24 CPC will be granted only when the applicant establishes real hardship, prejudice, or a genuine impediment to participating in the proceedings, and not merely on grounds of comparative convenience.
🔖 Hashtags
#Section24CPC #TransferPetition #MatrimonialDisputes #FamilyLaw #AllahabadHighCourt #CivilProcedureCode #LegalUpdate #CaseStudy #IndianJudiciary #LegalInsights
📌 Official Copy of judgement 👇