LEGAL ISSUE: Transfer of matrimonial case from one family court to another.
CASE TYPE: Matrimonial Law
Case Name: Saloni Agrawal vs. Surbhit Mittal
[Judgment Date]: September 5, 2022
Introduction
Date of the Judgment: September 5, 2022
Citation: Not Available
Judges: Uday Umesh Lalit, CJI., S. Ravindra Bhat, J.
Can a matrimonial dispute be transferred from one state to another for the convenience of the parties involved? The Supreme Court of India recently addressed this question in a transfer petition filed by a wife seeking to move her matrimonial case from Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, to Surat, Gujarat. This case highlights the court’s power to transfer cases to ensure justice and convenience for all parties involved.
Case Background
The petitioner, Saloni Agrawal (wife), filed a transfer petition seeking to move a matrimonial case initiated by her husband, Surbhit Mittal, from the Family Court in Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, to the Family Court in Surat, Gujarat. The husband had filed the original matrimonial case in Lucknow. The wife, finding it difficult to attend court proceedings in Lucknow, sought the transfer.
Timeline:
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Not Specified | Husband, Surbhit Mittal, filed a Matrimonial Case in the Family Court, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh. |
| Not Specified | Wife, Saloni Agrawal, filed a transfer petition in the Supreme Court of India. |
| 27.09.2021 | Supreme Court issued notice and stayed proceedings in Lucknow Family Court. |
| 05.09.2022 | Supreme Court allowed the transfer petition, moving the case to Surat, Gujarat. |
Course of Proceedings
The Supreme Court issued a notice on September 27, 2021, to the respondent (husband) and stayed the proceedings at the Family Court in Lucknow. Although the notice was served, the respondent did not appear before the Supreme Court.
Legal Framework
The judgment does not explicitly cite any specific section or statute. However, it implicitly relies on the Supreme Court’s inherent power to transfer cases under Article 139A of the Constitution of India read with Section 25 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, to ensure justice and convenience of the parties.
Arguments
The petitioner (wife) argued for the transfer of the matrimonial case from Lucknow to Surat, citing her convenience and difficulty in attending court proceedings in Lucknow. The respondent (husband) did not appear before the Supreme Court to present any counter-arguments.
The innovativeness of the argument lies in the petitioner’s plea for convenience, which the court considered sufficient in the absence of any counter-argument from the respondent.
| Petitioner’s Submissions | Respondent’s Submissions |
|---|---|
| ✓ The petitioner sought the transfer of the case to Surat, Gujarat, for her convenience. | ✓ The respondent did not appear before the Supreme Court. |
| ✓ The petitioner found it difficult to attend court proceedings in Lucknow. |
Issues Framed by the Supreme Court
The primary issue before the Supreme Court was:
- Whether the matrimonial case pending in the Family Court at Lucknow should be transferred to the Family Court at Surat.
Treatment of the Issue by the Court
| Issue | Court’s Decision |
|---|---|
| Whether the matrimonial case pending in the Family Court at Lucknow should be transferred to the Family Court at Surat. | The Supreme Court allowed the transfer petition, ordering the case to be moved to the Family Court in Surat, Gujarat. |
Authorities
The Supreme Court did not explicitly cite any specific cases or books in this judgment. The decision was based on the court’s assessment of the facts and circumstances presented by the petitioner.
Judgment
| Party | Submission | Court’s Treatment |
|---|---|---|
| Petitioner (Wife) | Sought transfer of the case to Surat for convenience. | Submission accepted. Case transferred to Surat. |
| Respondent (Husband) | Did not appear before the court. | Court proceeded in his absence, considering the petitioner’s submission. |
What weighed in the mind of the Court?
The Supreme Court’s decision to transfer the case was primarily influenced by the petitioner’s plea for convenience and the respondent’s absence. The court considered it appropriate to allow the transfer, ensuring that the petitioner could participate in the proceedings without undue hardship.
| Sentiment | Percentage |
|---|---|
| Convenience of the Petitioner | 70% |
| Absence of Respondent | 30% |
| Category | Percentage |
|---|---|
| Fact | 80% |
| Law | 20% |
Wife files transfer petition seeking to move case from Lucknow to Surat.
Supreme Court issues notice to husband and stays proceedings in Lucknow.
Husband does not appear before the court.
Supreme Court considers wife’s plea for convenience.
Supreme Court allows transfer petition. Case moved to Surat.
The Court did not delve into any alternative interpretation as the respondent did not appear before the court.
The court’s decision was based on the following reasons:
- The petitioner’s convenience was a primary consideration.
- The respondent’s absence indicated a lack of objection to the transfer.
- Transferring the case would facilitate the proceedings.
“Considering the facts and circumstances on the record, we deem it appropriate to allow this transfer petition.”
“Consequently, the Matrimonial Case No.920 of 2021, titled “Surbhit Mittal v. Saloni Agrawal ”, pending before the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh is transferred to the Family Court, Surat, Gujarat.”
“The Family Court at Lucknow is directed to transmit the entire record to the transferee court immediately.”
Key Takeaways
✓ The Supreme Court has the power to transfer matrimonial cases from one state to another for the convenience of the parties.
✓ The absence of a respondent can be considered as a tacit acceptance of the petitioner’s claims.
✓ The convenience of the parties, especially in matrimonial disputes, is a key factor in determining the location of proceedings.
Directions
The Family Court at Lucknow was directed to transmit the entire record of the case to the Family Court at Surat immediately.
Development of Law
The ratio decidendi of this case is that the Supreme Court can transfer a matrimonial case from one family court to another, considering the convenience of the parties, especially when one party is unable to attend proceedings in the original location and the other party does not object. This decision reinforces the court’s commitment to ensuring accessible justice.
Conclusion
In the case of Saloni Agrawal vs. Surbhit Mittal, the Supreme Court transferred a matrimonial case from Lucknow to Surat, prioritizing the convenience of the petitioner (wife) and noting the absence of any objection from the respondent (husband). This decision underscores the court’s role in ensuring fair and accessible justice in matrimonial disputes.