Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SMT RAJESHWARI AGARWAL versus SHIV DAYAL

High Court of Rajasthan

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


SMT RAJESHWARI AGARWAL v SHIV DAYAL - CTA Case No. 32 of 2006 [2006] RD-RJ 2907 (23 November 2006)

S.B. Civil Transfer Application No.32 Of 2006.

Smt. Rajeshwari Agarwal Vs. Shiv Dayal

Date Of Order ::: 23.11.2006.

Hon'ble Mr. Narendra Kumar Jain J.

Mr. Anurag Sharma, Counsel for applicant-appellant

Mr. A.M. Khan, Counsel for non-applicant-respondent

By the Court :

Heard learned counsel for both the parties.

The applicant-Rajeshwari Agarwal has filed this transfer application under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 for transferring the Civil

Miscellaneous Case bearing No.26/2006 pending before the Additional District Judge, Gangapur City, District

Sawai Madhopur to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Bayana, District Bharatpur.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant initiated a criminal proceedings against 2nd the respondent under Section 498-A I.P.C., on

February 2006 and under Section 125 Cr.P.C., on 07.03.2006 at Bayana and only thereafter the respondent filed a present petition under Section 9 of the Hindu

Marriage Act at Gangapur City. He further contended that the respondent is already attending two cases at

Bayana, therefore, it will be just and proper to transfer the present case also at Bayana. The respondent contended that the present case may not be transferred at Bayana and it may be transferred at

Hindaun City, which will be nearer to both the parties.

The other facts have not been controverted by him.

After considering the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties, I allow this transfer application and transfer the Civil Miscellaneous Case

Case (Hindu Marriage Act) No.26/2006 from the Court of

Additional District Judge, Gangapur City to the Court of Additional District Judge, Bayana.

A copy of this order may be sent to both the concerned Courts for doing the needful in the matter.

(Narendra Kumar Jain) J. ashok/


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.