High CourtsSingle Bench(2026) 09 KAR CK 0600

Shruti @ Amrutha vs Sharanayya Swamy

Karnataka High Court, Kalaburagi Bench · Decided on 3 September 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
K V Aravind, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Civil Petition No.200043 of 2025 (RES)

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

10 paragraphs · 341 words

Heard Sri B.K. Hiremath, learned counsel for the petitioner.

2.

This petition is filed by the wife seeking transfer of M.C.No.45/2025, pending on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Sindhanur, to the court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Raichur.

3.

Sri B.K. Hiremath, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner is residing at Raichur, where M.C.No.34/2025 has been filed under Section 13(1)(i-a) (i-b) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, whereas the respondent has instituted M.C.No.45/2025 under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, before the jurisdictional Court at Sindhanur. It is further submitted that the distance between Raichur and Sindhanur is about 130 kilometres, and the petitioner finds it difficult to travel such distance, particularly as she is required to take care of her aged parents. Hence, it is prayed that M.C.No.45/2025 be transferred to the jurisdictional Court at Raichur.

4.

Notice to the respondent is held sufficient vide order dated 03.09.2026.

5.

Considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

6.

On perusal of the memorandum of M.C.No.45/2025, it is evident that the residence of the petitioner herein is shown as Raichur. It is well settled that, while considering a prayer for transfer of matrimonial proceedings, the convenience of the wife is of paramount consideration. The petitioner is also required to take care of her aged parents. In such circumstances, it would be difficult for her to effectively participate in the proceedings at Sindhanur. It is also contended that a parallel proceeding under Section 13(1)(i-a) (i-b) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, is pending before the jurisdictional Court at Raichur. The trial of both petitions before one Court would not only be convenient for the parties but would also facilitate the effective and expeditious adjudication of the dispute.

7.

In view of the above, the following:

O R D E R

(i)

The civil petition is allowed.

ii) The M.C.No.45/2025, pending on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Sindhanur, is hereby withdrawn and transferred to the court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Raichur.