Calcutta HC: “Inconvenience Of Wife Should Be Prime Consideration Where Suit Will Be Heard”

Gender Biased judiciary is not a myth, and each time a court pronounces the same, it is clear that Indian matrimonial laws only and only favour the women. Of course, most judgements are also shielded by the cover of a minor child, whose custody is given to the mother by default in 99.99% cases.

Case:

• The Calcutta High Court has directed the transfer of a matrimonial suit and a case for guardianship of a minor child on the ground that the inconvenience of wife should be the prime consideration in deciding where the suit will be heard
• The court also held that when the application is in respect of the guardianship of a minor, it is to be filed in the court under whose territorial jurisdiction the minor, ordinarily resides
• Ordering the transfer of the suit from Jalpaiguri to Durgapur, Justice Bibek Chaudhuri observed that the Supreme Court has in a plethora of decisions held that inconvenience of the wife should be treated as the prime consideration in a proceeding seeking transfer of a case for trial arising out of a matrimonial suit
• The wife had prayed for transfer of the matrimonial suit and also a case seeking guardianship and custody of their child filed by the husband at the Jalpaiguri district court
• The petitioner’s lawyer Uday Shankar Chattopadhyay claimed, that the woman is residing at her matrimonial home in Durgapur with their 13-year-old child, since she was allegedly abandoned by her husband in 2017
• The husband had filed a suit for dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce and also prayed for the custody of their son in another petition at the court of the district judge, Jalpaiguri

ALSO READ –

After Taking Away Child Custody From Father, Wife Surrenders Daughter To Orphanage

Hearing the petition for transfer of the suit, Justice Chaudhuri noted that the petitioner has contended that distance between Durgapur and Jalpaiguri is more than 600 kilometres and it is not financially possible for her to bear such expenses for the journey to contest the suit.

• The petitioner also stated that she has no income of her own and is fully dependent on her parents
• Chattopadhyay claimed that the husband has not paid any maintenance for his wife and the son, who studies at a school in Durgapur

The court observed that under such circumstances, the petitioner will of course suffer inconvenience to travel to Jalpaiguri from Durgapur.

ALSO READ –

Husband Records Video Before Suicide; Names Wife For Harassment; Pleads Not To Give Her Child Custody

Justice Chaudhuri also said that in the instant case the minor child ordinarily resides at Durgapur with his mother and is a student of a school there and therefore, the court of the additional district judge, Durgapur has the jurisdiction under the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 to try the said miscellaneous case. Justice Chaudhuri said in his order,

Moreover, for the benefit of the minor child, the said miscellaneous case ought to be transferred to Durgapur for hearing and disposal.

Our Take

• As men fighting never ending divorce battles, this is yet another classic example of how our laws only favour the women
• In many cases, men do actually understand how inconvenient it is for a woman with minor child to travel for dates and are also willing to accept her jurisdiction
• However, the endless hearings which the woman chooses to drag for her benefit, only leads to frustration for the man who is actually working and in a way funding the woman to fight cases against him
• Often minor children are used as tools by these women – be it taking advantage of their tender age or giving endless excuses about their health and education
• As a matter of fact, even if the woman drags a frivolous case for 20-years, she still gets the benefit because the child resides with her
• Ironically, whenever a fathers ask for child custody, the women prefer to move back to their hometowns to ensure there is no connect or bond between the father and child on a regular basis
• Incidentally, a woman who gets ‘inconvenienced’ fighting a divorce battle in her husband’s jurisdiction, is fully abled and motivated to claim her share and right in the matrimonial property where the husband resides
• Our system needs a serious overhaul, especially with the unrealistic timelines that make a mess of a separated husband’s life

ALSO READ –

https://mensdayout.com/his-story/498a-cases-drags-for-20-years/

Follow www.mensdayout.com on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram

Join our Facebook Group or follow us on social media by clicking on the icons below