Uttarakhand High Court
C24/105/2024 of RAJ MAMTA Vs JAGDISH PRASAD on 3 January 2026
OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Civil Misc. Transfer Application No.105 of 2024 Raj Mamta ......Applicant Versus Jagdish Prasad . ….Respondent Present: Ms. Sudha Tamta, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. B.N. Molekhi, Advocate for the respondent. Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J.(Oral) The
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Civil Misc. Transfer Application No.105 of 2024
Raj Mamta
......Applicant
Versus
Jagdish Prasad
.
….Respondent
Present:
Ms. Sudha Tamta, Advocate for the applicant.
Mr. B.N. Molekhi, Advocate for the respondent.
Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J.(Oral)
The applicant seeks transfer of Civil Family Suit No. 120 of 2024, Jagdish Prasad Vs. Raj Mamta, (“the Suit”), under Section 13
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
(1) (i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 from the court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Almora to the court at Pauri Garhwal.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
3. It is the case of the applicant that she and the respondent were married on 05.08.2018. The respondent, her husband had filed a petition for divorce in the court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Almora. The applicant is Assistant Professor in Government Degree College, Pokhra, District Pauri Garhwal, which is a remote area. She had a pregnancy of 7 months when the transfer application was filed. It is not possible for her to travel around 200 Kms to attend the proceedings of the court in District Almora. Therefore, the case may be transferred.
4. Objections have been filed by the respondents.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that she is a working woman. Now, she has given a birth to a child, who is 10 months old. She is posted in District Pauri Garhwal. It will be much
2
inconvenient to her to travel around with a baby child to Almora to attend the proceedings. Whereas, the respondent, who is a Government Teacher may very conveniently attend the proceedings in the court at Pauri.
6. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that the respondent is working in Ranikhet. The parental house of the applicant is in Haldwani, therefore, the case may be transferred at Haldwani.
7. It is definite case of the applicant that she is working in Government Degree College, Pokhra, which is in District Pauri Garhwal and at present she is staying in Pauri. She is on Child Care Leave. She recently gave birth to a child who is 10 months old. It is the case of the applicant that it is inconvenient and not possible for her to attend the court’s proceeding with a baby child.
8. Having considered, this Court is of the view that interest of justice would be better served if the suit is transferred from the court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Almora to the court at Pauri Garhwal. Accordingly, the transfer application deserves to be allowed.
9. The Transfer application is allowed.
10. Civil Family Suit No. 120 of 2024, Jagdish Prasad Vs. Raj Mamta is transferred from the court of from the court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Almora to the court at Pauri Garhwal.
(Ravindra Maithani, J.) 03.01.2026
Jitendra