Orissa High Court Rejects Cancer-Survivor Husband's Plea To Transfer Maintenance Case

"Given the prevailing socio-economic paradigm in the Indian society, generally, it is the wife’s convenience which must be looked at while considering transfer." Orissa High Court, in a significant ruling dated 21 August 2026, held that the convenience of the wife remains the paramount consideration while adjudicating transfer petitions in matrimonial disputes.

A single bench of Justice Sanjay Kumar Mishra refused a husband's plea to transfer a Section 125 CrPC maintenance proceeding from Jajpur to Bhubaneswar, emphasizing that digital court infrastructure and virtual appearance can effectively redress logistical hardships without displacing the proceedings from the wife's local forum.

The petitioner-husband, employed as a Senior Assistant at IIT Argul, Bhubaneswar, filed a transfer petition seeking to shift CRP No. 136 of 2024 from the Family Court, Jajpur to the Family Court, Bhubaneswar, citing his ongoing medical treatment for cancer at AIIMS Bhubaneswar. The opposite party-wife strongly opposed the transfer, submitting that she is a destitute lady taking care of a four-year-old child and residing with her aged mother at Jajpur without any independent source of livelihood.

The primary question before the court was whether the maintenance proceeding instituted by the wife under Section 125 CrPC ought to be transferred from Jajpur to Bhubaneswar on the grounds of the husband's medical ailment. The court was also called upon to determine whether the adoption of video conferencing facilities could adequately balance the equities and eliminate travel distress for the contesting parties.

Wife's Socio-Economic Convenience Paramount In Matrimonial Transfers

Justice Sanjay Kumar Mishra reiterated the well-established legal principle governing forum convenience in matrimonial litigations, placing heavy reliance on the Supreme Court's landmark ruling in N.C.V. Aishwarya v. A.S. Saravana Karthik Sha (2022 SCC OnLine SC 1199). The High Court underscored that courts exercising powers under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure or related criminal transfer provisions must evaluate the economic soundness, social strata, and standard of living of both spouses before directing transfer of proceedings.

The bench recalled that the cardinal principle for ordering a transfer is the demand of the ends of justice, keeping in view the protective umbrella under which the dependent spouse seeks sustenance. Taking into account that the wife is residing at her parental home with no source of income and shoulders the responsibility of raising a four-year-old child, the court held that compelling her to travel approximately 120 kilometres to Bhubaneswar would cause severe hardship.

"In matrimonial matters, wherever Courts are called upon to consider the plea of transfer, the Courts have to take into consideration the economic soundness of both the parties, the social strata of the spouses and their behavioural pattern."

Husband's Health Grounds Balanced With Admissions On Record

While the petitioner-husband contended that being a cancer patient undergoing treatment made day-to-day travel between Bhubaneswar and Jajpur difficult, the court examined the specific admissions contained in the transfer petition. The wife's counsel highlighted that the husband had himself admitted in his pleadings that following surgery, he was fine with medications and actively discharging his employment responsibilities at IIT Argul.

The court observed that because of an earlier stay order obtained by the husband in the transfer petition, the Family Court at Jajpur had been precluded from passing even an interim maintenance order for the sustenance of the deserted wife and minor child. Evaluating the overall circumstances, the bench held that the grounds urged by the husband were insufficient to uproot the pending maintenance case from Jajpur.

Video Conferencing Allowed Under High Court Rules

To alleviate any physical difficulty faced by the husband in attending proceedings at Jajpur, the High Court directed that both parties are at liberty to appear through virtual mode before the Family Court. The bench instructed the trial judge to explore the video conferencing facilities available in the court premises in terms of the Orissa High Court Video Conferencing for Courts Rules, 2020.

The court clarified that while parties can utilize the hybrid mode for regular procedural hearings, their physical presence would remain mandatory during effective stages of hearing, particularly for the recording and cross-examination of witnesses, or whenever specifically directed by the trial court.

Expeditious Disposal Mandate For 2024 Maintenance Proceeding

Noting that the maintenance petition pertained to the year 2024, the High Court issued peremptory directions to the Family Court, Jajpur, to fast-track the proceedings and conclude the matter expeditiously, preferably by the end of December 2026. The bench strictly directed both parties to refrain from seeking unnecessary adjournments and cooperate fully to ensure the timely delivery of justice.

The High Court accordingly disposed of the transfer petition, vacated the interim stay order dated 22 August 2024 granted in I.A. No. 213 of 2024, and cleared the way for the Family Court, Jajpur, to proceed with the determination of maintenance.

Date of Decision: 21 August 2026