Divorce Case Transfer | Wife Earned More, Didn’t Disclose Pending Cases, Still Wanted Husband To Travel: Rajasthan HC Rejects Plea

RAJASTHAN: The Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench, dismissed a wife’s application seeking transfer of a matrimonial civil suit from Alwar to Kota or Hanumangarh, finding that shifting the case would cause comparatively greater inconvenience to the husband.

Justice Chandra Prakash Shrimali passed the order on 3 September 2026. The application was filed under Section 24 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

The parties were married according to Muslim rites on 29 May 2022. A civil suit concerning declaration of divorce and mandatory injunction was pending before the Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Alwar. The wife had earlier worked as a Nursing Officer, Alwar, but was subsequently transferred to Kota.

After her transfer, she approached the High Court seeking transfer of the Alwar case to Kota or Hanumangarh. She argued that her family members lived at Hanumangarh and her brother lived at Chandigarh, requiring her to travel there as well. She also relied on the distance between Alwar and Kota and the difficulty of repeatedly travelling to Alwar.

Read Also:- False Domestic Violence Case? Faridabad Court Discharges Husband’s Family, Says Vague & Omnibus Allegations Not Enough to Proceed

The husband opposed the transfer. He submitted that the wife was a Central Government employee, whereas he worked in a private job in Sonipat, Haryana, and his salary was substantially lower than hers. He argued that transferring the matter would instead increase his own travelling distance and expenses.

Importantly, the husband also brought the connected matrimonial litigation at Alwar to the Court’s attention. According to the order, other proceedings instituted against him were already pending there, including proceedings concerning an FIR and a case under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act. He was required to appear at Alwar in those matters.

The Court also noted that the wife had not disclosed these pending proceedings while seeking transfer. This became relevant because the transfer request could not be considered only from the viewpoint of inconvenience in one isolated case.

The High Court considered the competing hardships of both parties. It observed that if the civil case were transferred to Kota or Hanumangarh, the husband would have to travel separately to those places while still travelling to Alwar for the other cases pending against him.

Read Also:- False DV Case | Wife Alleging That In-Laws Supported Husband Not Enough To Invoke Domestic Violence Act: Karnataka High Court

The Court further considered the wife’s employment in government service and the husband’s comparatively lower private-sector income. Therefore, although the wife relied on the inconvenience of travelling from Kota to Alwar, the Court found that transferring the case could create greater comparative inconvenience for the husband.

The Court also recorded that the parties had no child, reducing the possibility of any additional difficulty connected with taking a child to court proceedings.

After considering the entire factual background, connected litigation, travelling distance, the parties' financial position, and comparative hardship, the Rajasthan High Court found no sufficient reason to shift the case away from Alwar.

The Court ultimately concluded that transferring the case would cause greater inconvenience to the husband, whereas continuing the matter at Alwar would not impose the same degree of hardship on the wife in the circumstances recorded in the order.

Accordingly, the wife’s transfer application was rejected, and the matrimonial civil proceedings were permitted to continue before the court at Alwar.

EXPLANATORY TABLE OF LAWS AND SECTIONS

CASE DETAILS

KEY TAKEAWAYS

• Wife’s inconvenience is not the only inconvenience: The Court examined the practical hardship faced by the husband too.
• One marriage, multiple cases, multiple court appearances: The husband was already required to attend connected proceedings at Alwar.
• Financial reality matters: The Court considered that the wife was a Central Government employee, while the husband had a lower-paying private job.
• Transfer could have increased the husband’s litigation burden: Moving one case while other proceedings remained at Alwar could force him to travel between different cities for disputes arising from the same matrimonial conflict.
• Transfer is not an automatic privilege: After comparing the circumstances of both sides, the Rajasthan High Court dismissed the transfer application and kept the case at Alwar.