The High Court stated that female plaintiffs should be given more weight and consideration and that courts should refrain from subjecting them to unnecessary burdens.
The Rajasthan High Court has declared that it is a well-established legal principle that in a transfer case, courts must give greater weight to the convenience of female litigants.
Female plaintiffs should not be subjected to unnecessary burdens when legal procedures are transferred from one court to another, according to single-judge Justice Chandra Kumar Songara.
“It is well established legal precedent that, when considering the merits of a transfer application, courts must give greater weight and consideration to the convenience of female litigants, and that transfer of legal proceedings from one Court to another should ordinarily be permitted taking into account their convenience, and that courts should refrain from placing female litigants under undue stress. The convenience of the wife is to be prioritized over the convenience of the husband in such situations,” the order stated.
The Court was hearing a petition by the petitioner-wife to transfer a divorce petition from the court of Additional District Judge, Kekri District, Ajmer to the family court in Kota, where she currently resides after the respondent-husband allegedly abandoned her.
The petitioner’s lawyer claimed that the court in Kekri was 100 kilometers away from her home and that a one-way trip takes three to five hours. It was brought to the attention of the High Court that she was a homemaker with no source of income and no personal way of transportation.
It was also claimed that the petitioner’s daughter was six years old and required constant attention, so she couldn’t leave her alone for more than 7-8 hours and couldn’t bring her to court.
The respondent’s attorney, on the other side, objected to the plea, claiming that he was living with his parents and that his father had back trouble and was unable to walk well, making it impossible for him to travel to Kota.
It was also claimed that the petitioner, who is an attorney, was seeking to sway the proceedings.
While considering the opposing arguments, the single-judge discussed the Supreme Court’s decision in Sumita Singh Vs. Kumar Sanjay, in which it was held that “it is the husband’s suit against the wife.” As a result, the wife’s convenience must be considered. The aforementioned circumstances are sufficient to make the petition for transfer absolute.”
As a result, the Court granted the application, citing the petitioner’s reasons as persuasive.
Advocate Abhishek Bhardwaj represented the petitioner, while Advocate Arnav Singh represented the respondent.
