An Application Under Section 24 Of The … vs Suvendu Biswal on 28 July, 2026

    0
    3
    ADVERTISEMENT

    Orissa High Court

    An Application Under Section 24 Of The … vs Suvendu Biswal on 28 July, 2026

    Author: Mruganka Sekhar Sahoo

    Bench: Mruganka Sekhar Sahoo

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
    
                                     TRP (C) No.259 of 2025
    
       An application under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure,
       1908.
    
            Namita Nayak                       ....                           Petitioner
    
                                             Versus
            Suvendu Biswal                    ....                     Opposite Parties
            and another
    
            Advocates appeared in the case :
    
               For Petitioner: Mr. Karunakar Gaya, Advocate
    
               For Opp. Parties: Mr. Sujit Kumar Biswal, Advocate
                                 (for O.P. No.1)
    
    
       CORAM:
       THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MRUGANKA SEKHAR SAHOO
    
                                     JUDGMENT
    

    —————————————————————————————
    Date of hearing: 14.07.2026: Date of judgment.28.07.2026

    —————————————————————————————

    SPONSORED

    MRUGANKA SEKHAR SAHOO, J.

    1. The petition under Section 24 of the C.P.C. has been
    filed by the wife in the marriage seeking transfer of C.P.
    No.424 of 2025 pending in the court of learned Judge, Family
    Court, Cuttack to the court of learned Judge, Family Court,
    Jagatsinghpur.

    TRP (C) No.259 of 2025
    Page 1 of 6

    The C.P. has been filed by the opposite party no.1-
    husband in the marriage under Section 13(1) (ia) and 1(b) of
    the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for grant of decree of divorce
    and for annulment of the marriage between the petitioner and
    the opposite party no.1 solemnized on 15.01.2021.

    2. Learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel
    for the opposite party no.1 were heard at some length.

    3. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies on the Section
    24
    of the C.P.C. to submit that convenience of the petitioner
    should be looked to by this Court for transferring the pending
    C.P. from Cuttack to Jagatsinghpur. For case of reference,
    Section 24 of CPC is reproduced herein:

    “24. General power of transfer and withdrawal.–

    (1) On the application of any of the parties and after
    notice to the parties and after hearing such of them as
    desired to be heard, or of its own motion, without such
    notice, the High Court or the District Court may, at any
    stage–

    (a) transfer any suit, appeal or other proceeding pending
    before it for trial or disposal to any Court subordinate to
    it and competent to try or dispose of the same; or

    (b) withdraw any suit, appeal or other proceeding
    pending in any Court subordinate to it; and

    (i) try or dispose of the same; or

    (ii) transfer the same for trial or disposal to any Court
    subordinate to it and competent to try or dispose of the
    same; or

    (iii) re-transfer the same for trial or disposal to the Court
    from which it was withdrawn. …”

    TRP (C) No.259 of 2025
    Page 2 of 6

    4. Due to paucity of time the matter could not reach
    during the day’s proceeding and mention is made by the
    learned counsel appearing for the parties. Memo of date is filed
    by the learned counsel for the petitioner which states thus:

    “I have no objection if the aforesaid T.R.P. (C) is
    allowed & the C.P.No.424/25 pending in the court of ld
    Judge Family Court, Cuttack may be transferred to the ld
    Judge Family Court, Jagatsinghpur. Hence this Memo as
    per instruction of op. party no.1/my client.” (sic)

    The memo is taken on record. Scanned copy be updated.

    5. Regarding jurisdiction of the courts to take up the
    petition, this Court takes note of Section 19 under Chapter V
    of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955
    which provides Jurisdiction
    and Procedure and is reproduced herein:

    “19. Court to which petition shall be presented.-
    Every petition under this Act shall be presented to the
    district court within the local limits of whose ordinary
    original civil jurisdiction-

    –(i) the marriage was solemnised, or

    (ii) the respondent, at the time of the presentation of the
    petition, resides, or

    (iii) the parties to the marriage last resided together, or
    (iii-a)in case the wife is the petitioner, where she is
    residing on the date of presentation of the petition, or

    (iv)the petitioner is residing at the time of the
    presentation of the petition, in a case where the
    respondent is, at that time, residing outside the
    territories to which this Act extends, or has not been
    heard of as being alive for a period of seven years or
    more by those persons who would naturally have heard
    of him if he were alive.”

    TRP (C) No.259 of 2025
    Page 3 of 6

    6. Further, Section 7 of the Family Courts Act, 1984
    provides Jurisdiction of Courts’ to entertain applications has
    to be taken note of and is reproduced herein:

    “7. Jurisdiction.-(1) Subject to the other provisions of
    this Act, a Family Court shall-

    (a)have and exercise all the jurisdiction exercisable by
    any district court or any subordinate civil court under
    any law for the time being in force in respect of suits and
    proceedings of the nature referred to in the Explanation;
    and

    (b) be deemed, for the purposes of exercising such
    jurisdiction under such law, to be a district court or, as
    the case may be, such subordinate civil court for the
    area to which the jurisdiction of the Family Court
    extends.

    Explanation.-The suits and proceedings referred to in
    this sub-section are suits and proceedings of the
    following nature, namely:-…”

    As has been submitted by learned counsel for opposite
    party no.1 and not disputed at the Bar that the court at
    Cuttack has the jurisdiction to try the C.P.

    7. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the decision, Kulwinder
    Kaur ALIAS Kulwinder Gurcharan Singh V. Kandi Friends
    Education Trust and others
    : (2008) 3 SCC 659 at pagraph-
    23 discussing the scope of Sections 24 & 25 of the CPC has
    held as follows :

    “23. Reading Sections 24 and 25 of the Code together
    and keeping in view various judicial pronouncements,
    certain broad propositions as to what may constitute a
    ground for transfer have been laid down by courts. They
    are balance of convenience or inconvenience to the

    TRP (C) No.259 of 2025
    Page 4 of 6
    plaintiff or the defendant or witness; convenience or
    inconvenience of a particular place of trial having regard
    to the nature of evidence on the points involved in the
    suit; issues raised by the parties; reasonable
    apprehension in the mind of the litigant that he might
    not get justice in the court in which the suit is pending;
    important questions of law involved or a considerable
    section of public interested in the litigation; “interest of
    justice” demanding for transfer of suit, appeal or other
    proceeding, etc. Above are some of the instances which
    are germane in considering the question of transfer of a
    suit, appeal or other proceeding. They are, however,
    illustrative in nature and by no means be treated as
    exhaustive. If on the above or other relevant
    considerations, the court feels that the plaintiff or the
    defendant is not likely to have a “fair trial” in the court
    from which he seeks to transfer a case, it is not only the
    power, but the duty of the court to make such order. “

    [Emphasis Supplied]

    8. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the
    learned counsel for the opposite party No.1 and having
    considered the various aspects as stated in the petition and
    submissions seeking transfer as well as applying the principles
    laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court as noted above and
    in the interest of justice, this Court allows the prayer for
    transfer of the C.P. No. 424 of 2025 pending before the learned
    Judge, Family Court, Cuttack to the court of learned Judge,
    Family Court, Jagatsinghpur.

    It is further directed that the parties shall cooperate in
    expeditious disposal of the matter before the learned Judge,
    Family Court, Jagatsinghpur.

    TRP (C) No.259 of 2025
    Page 5 of 6

    9. Both the parties should take note of the fact that there
    has been several Information and Communication Technology
    (ICT) initiatives by this Court throughout the State to make it
    convenient for the parties to appear before a Court through
    Video Conferencing. The learned court that would take up the
    proceeding shall explore the possibility of utilizing the ICT for
    convenience of the appearing parties and for expeditious
    disposal of pending litigation, upon application made by any of
    the parties seeking such facility.

    It is further directed the parties shall cooperate in
    prosecuting the matter with due diligence as it is pending
    since 2025.

    10. The learned Judge, Family Court, Jagatsinghpur shall
    do well to proceed in adjudicating the matter as expeditiously
    as possible depending upon the number of cases pending on
    board.

    11. The petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid
    observations/directions.

    Copy of this order shall be forwarded to the learned
    Judge, Family Court, Cuttack to be kept in the file of C.P.
    No.424 of 2025 and to the court of learned Judge, Family
    Court, Jagatsinghpur for reference.

    Signature Not Verified Mruganka Sekhar Sahoo
    Digitally Signed

    Judge
    Signed by: JYOSTNARANIOrissa
    MAJHEEHigh Court, Cuttack
    Reason: Authentication The 28th July, 2026/Jyostna
    Location: OHC
    Date: 28-Jul-2026 17:10:47
    TRP (C) No.259 of 2025
    Page 6 of 6



    Source link

    LEAVE A REPLY

    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here