Uttarakhand High Court
C24/23/2025 of MANISHA Vs VINOD KUMAR on 4 December 2025
OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Civil Misc. Transfer Application No. 23 of 2025 Manisha ......Applicant Versus Vinod Kumar ….Respondent Present: Mr. Siddharth Bankoti, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. Sushil Kumar, Advocate for the respondent. Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J.(Oral) The
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.
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Civil Misc. Transfer Application No. 23 of 2025
Manisha
......Applicant Versus
Vinod Kumar
….Respondent
Present: Mr. Siddharth Bankoti, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. Sushil Kumar, Advocate for the respondent.
Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J.(Oral)
The applicant seeks transfer of Civil Suit No. 1 of 2025, Vinod Kumar Vs. Manisha, under Section 98 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (“the case”) from the Family Court, Chamoli, District Chamoli to the court at Dehradun.
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 18.06.2021 at Pokhari, District Chamoli. There was some matrimonial discord. The applicant is currently working in Health Department in Vikas Nagar, District Dehradun. The respondent has filed the case for Restitution of Conjugal Rights at Chamoli court and it is too far for the applicant to travel and attend the proceedings of the court at Chamoli. Therefore, the case may be transferred to the court at Dehradun.
4. Objections has been filed by the respondent and refuted the claim of the applicant.
5. It is a case of the respondent that he is serving as Revenue Inspector, District Chamoli.
6. It is admitted that the applicant is working in District Dehradun and the respondent is working in District Chamoli. The respondent has filed a case for Restitution of Conjugal Rights in Chamoli court.
7. It is a matter of convenience, but the Court interacted with the learned counsel for the parties and after seeking instructions, learned counsel for both the parties are agreeable that the case may be transferred to the case at Pauri. However, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner may be given a liberty to join the proceedings through video conferencing.
8. This High Court had already formulated High Court of Uttarakhand Video Conferencing Rules-2020. Parties are always free to seek indulgence of the Court to join the proceedings through video conferencing.
9. With these observations, the civil misc. transfer application deserves to be allowed.
10. The civil misc. transfer application is allowed.
11. The Civil Suit No. 1 of 2025, Vinod Kumar Vs. Manisha is transferred from the Family court at Chamoli to the court Family Court at Pauri.
12. Parties shall appear before the Family Court, Pauri on 07.01.2025.
(Ravindra Maithani, J.) 04.12.2025
Jitendra