Consensual Relationship That Later Turns Sour Is Not Rape: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Breach of Promise Case Double Presumption of Innocence Applies; No Interference Unless Trial Court Judgment Is Perverse: Allahabad High Court in Murder Appeal Under BNSS A Single Act of Corruption Warrants Dismissal – 32 Years of Service Offers No Immunity: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds ASI’s Removal Suit Against Trustee Without Charity Commissioner’s Consent Is Statutorily Barred: Bombay High Court Inherent Power Under Section 528 BNSS Not a Substitute for Article 226 When FIR Is Under Challenge Without Chargesheet or Cognizance Order: Allahabad High Court Possession Without Title Is Legally Insubstantial: Gujarat HC Dismisses Appeal By Dairy Cooperative Over Void Land Transfer You Can Prosecute a Former Director, But You Can’t Force Him to Represent the Company: Calcutta High Court Lays Down Clear Limits on Corporate Representation in PMLA Cases Conviction Cannot Rest on Tainted Testimony of Injured Witnesses in Isolation: Bombay High Court Acquits Five in Murder Case One Attesting Witness is Sufficient if He Proves Execution and Attestation of Will as Required by Law: AP High Court Land Acquisition | Delay Cannot Defeat Just Compensation: P&H High Court Grants Enhanced Compensation Despite 12-Year Delay in Review Petitions by Landowners Allegations Implausible, Motivated by Malice: Kerala High Court Quashes Rape Case After Finding Abuse Claims a Counterblast to Civil Dispute Adoptions Under Hindu Law Need No Approval from District Magistrate: Madras High Court Declares Administrative Rejection of Adoptive Birth Certificate as Illegal

Supreme Court Grants Transfer of Matrimonial Case to Nagpur, Allows Video Conferencing for Respondent"

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent verdict, the Supreme Court of India, comprising a bench of HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V. NAGARATHNA and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN, allowed the transfer of a significant family court case under Section 25 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC). The case titled "SHWETA D SHAMKUWAR v. VINAY BORKAR" saw the petitioner, Shweta D Shamkuwar, seeking the relocation of her case from the Court of Principal Judge, (Family Court), Central District THC, Delhi, to the District Family Court at Nagpur, Maharashtra.

The Supreme Court's observation noted, "The petitioner has made out a case for transfer of the aforesaid petition," reflecting the court's decision to grant the transfer in the interest of justice. This move underscores the court's commitment to ensuring a fair and just legal process, acknowledging the circumstances and preferences of the parties involved.

Furthermore, the judgment also emphasized the importance of accommodating the respondent, Vinay Borkar, by reserving the liberty for him to appear through a video conferencing facility. The court declared that it would provide the necessary video conferencing facility if requested by the respondent.

In its final order, the Supreme Court allowed the transfer petition, directing the transfer of HMA case number 346/2023 to the District Family Court at Nagpur, Maharashtra. The court also noted that pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.

This verdict highlights the court's commitment to ensuring a fair and accessible legal process, taking into account the needs and circumstances of the parties involved. The provision for video conferencing reflects the court's adaptability in the modern age, making justice more accessible to all, even in cases with geographical disparities.

This judgment sets a precedent for the equitable and efficient handling of cases involving geographical challenges, ensuring that the pursuit of justice remains unhindered by logistical concerns.

Date of Decision: SEPTEMBER 27, 2023

SHWETA D SHAMKUWAR  vs VINAY BORKAR

Latest Legal News