The Karnataka High Court, dismissing the wife’s transfer petition in a divorce case stating that the husband’s inconvenience was greater, emphasised the need for a gender-neutral society.

The Court stated that only because the transfer Petition was moved by a woman, the transfer of the case as sought could not be effected. “All the attending facts and circumstances have to be looked into,” it remarked.

A Single Bench of Justice Chillakur Sumalatha remarked, “Constitutionally, a female has got equal rights as that of a male. As a matter of fact, women are the primary victims in most situations, but that does not mean that men are not affected by the cruelty of women. Therefore, there is necessity for a gender neutral society. Such a society aims at preventing separation of duties according to sex or gender. It will focus on equal treatment of men and women both in domestic affairs and work places. Equality should be in its truest sense and not at the expense of either gender. However admirable our efforts to safeguarding women may be, we should not overlook the challenges encountered by men in our society.

Advocate Murali B.S. represented the Petitioner, while Advocate Nagalingappa K. appeared for the Respondent.

Brief Facts

The wife filed a Petition under Section 24 of the CPC seeking the Court to withdraw and transfer the divorce case filed by the husband pending before the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Narasimharajapura, Chikkamagaluru District to the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Hosanagara, Shivamogga District.

The Wife submitted that her place of residence was 130 Kms away from the Court in which the dissolution of marriage case was pending. Therefore, she submitted that she was facing difficulty in attending the Court for each and every date of adjournment.

Opposing the transfer Petition, the husband submitted that the wife developed illicit intimacy with another person and left the matrimonial home to continue the said relationship. The husband further submitted that he was also looking after both the children the parties had. He stated that he had to cook, feed the children and send them to school and thereafter, was also required to attend the Court proceedings.

Therefore, the husband argued that if the case was transferred, the husband thus would face more difficulty.

Court’s Reasoning

The High Court noted, “Keeping aside the allegations laid against each other, the inconvenience which the respondent-husband would face to attend the Court would be more than that of the petitioner-wife as the respondent-husband is taking care of the children and the children are under his custody.

The Bench held, “Only because the transfer petition is moved by a woman, transfer of the case as sought for cannot be effected. All the attending facts and circumstances have to be looked into.

Consequently, the Court held, “This Court is of the view that the inconvenience projected by the petitioner to attend the Court at Narasimharajapura, Chikkamagaluru District will not be greater than the inconvenience that will be faced by the respondent-husband if the transfer of the case is effected. Also the tender aged children would be put to sufferance. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the relief sought for cannot be granted.

Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the Petition.

Cause Title: S v. R (Neutral Citation: 2025:KHC:263)

Click here to read/download the Order