Kiran Raj

The Karnataka High Court declined to transfer a matrimonial case from the Senior Civil Judge’s Court in Narasimharajapura, Chikkamagaluru District, to the Senior Civil Judge’s Court in Hosanagara, Shivamogga District. The court ruled that transferring the case would impose greater inconvenience on the respondent, who is the sole caregiver for two young children. The court noted that considerations of equality and fairness must account for the specific circumstances of both parties involved in the case.

The petitioner, the wife of the respondent, sought the transfer of the matrimonial case registered as M.C. No. 7/2023. The respondent filed the case seeking dissolution of their marriage. The petitioner argued that attending hearings in Narasimharajapura posed logistical difficulties due to the distance of approximately 130 kilometers between her residence in Hosanagara Taluk, Shivamogga District, and the court.

Represented by Advocate Sri Murali B.S., the petitioner submitted that the frequent travel required to attend hearings caused her significant inconvenience. She requested that the case be transferred to the Senior Civil Judge’s Court in Hosanagara, which is closer to her residence.

The respondent, represented by Advocate Sri Nagalingappa K., opposed the petition for transfer. He submitted that the petitioner had voluntarily left the marital home and alleged that she had entered into an extramarital relationship. He further stated that he had been taking care of their two children, aged 9 and 7, since the separation. The respondent stated that transferring the case to Hosanagara would disrupt his responsibilities as the sole caregiver, as he would need to make frequent trips to attend court proceedings.

The respondent’s claim regarding the custody of the children and their ages was not disputed by the petitioner. The respondent contended that balancing his caregiving responsibilities with court attendance in Hosanagara would create additional difficulties for him and the children.

The bench, led by Justice Dr. Chillakur Sumalatha, examined the circumstances of both parties before reaching a decision. The court noted that matrimonial disputes often present challenges for women, particularly in accessing judicial remedies. The court stated that the specific facts and circumstances of each case must be taken into consideration.

The court stated: “Constitutionally, a female has got equal rights as that of a male. However, efforts to safeguard women should not overlook the challenges encountered by men in our society.”

Justice Dr. Chillakur Sumalatha emphasized the principle of gender neutrality, noting that equality requires an unbiased assessment of the needs and circumstances of both genders. The court observed: “There is necessity for a gender-neutral society, which aims at preventing separation of duties according to sex or gender. Equality should be in its truest sense.”

Addressing the petitioner’s argument regarding the inconvenience of traveling to Narasimharajapura for court proceedings, the court acknowledged the validity of her concerns but also considered the respondent’s situation. The bench observed: “The inconvenience projected by the petitioner to attend the Court at Narasimharajapura will not be greater than the inconvenience that will be faced by the respondent-husband if the transfer of the case is effected.”

The court noted the implications that transferring the case could have on the respondent’s caregiving responsibilities. It stated that requiring the respondent to travel frequently to Hosanagara would disrupt the children’s routine and create additional hardship for the family.

The Karnataka High Court dismissed the petition to transfer the case. It stated: “This Court is of the view that the tender-aged children would be put to sufferance if the transfer is effected. Therefore, the relief sought for cannot be granted.”

The court further stated that while women’s rights are often given priority in matrimonial disputes, each case must be assessed individually to ensure fairness and justice for all parties involved.

The court directed that the matrimonial case would continue to be heard in the Senior Civil Judge’s Court in Narasimharajapura.

Case Title: XYZ v. XYZ
Case Number: Civil Petition No. 370 of 2024
Bench: Justice Dr. Chillakur Sumalatha

[Read/Download order]