LexDELMA LUBNA COELHO versus EDMOND CLINT FERNANDES
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B C D E F G H 473 DELMA LUBNA COELHO v. EDMOND CLINT FERNANDES (Transfer Petition (C) No. 1475 of 2021) APRIL 18, 2023 [RAJESH BINDAL AND ARAVIND KUMAR, JJ.] Transfer Petition – Divorce petition was filed by husband before Family Judge, Mangaluru, Karnataka – Present petition filed by wife, a permanent resident of Canada, presently based at Mumbai, Maharashtra seeking transfer of divorce petition from Mangaluru, Karnataka to Family Court at Bandra, Mumbai, Maharashtra – Held: Petitioner is a permanent resident of Canada – She had shifted there in the year 2014 and was working there on a well-paid job, however, came to India for the matrimonial alliance – As the petitioner is a permanent resident of Canada, she must be travelling abroad regularly – She was in Canada throughout the mediation process and attended the proceedings online – Both the parties are well educated and engaged in their own jobs and professions – Petitioner can travel to Mangaluru to attend the hearing of the case and can also seek exemption from appearance whenever required – No case made out for transfer of the petition from Karnataka to Maharashtra – Constitution of India – Article 142. Matrimonial Cases – Transfer Petitions – Held: Number of transfer petitions are filed in matrimonial cases, primarily by the wives seeking transfer of the matrimonial proceedings initiated by the husband – Normally, Supreme Court has been accepting the prayer made while showing leniency towards ladies – However, this leniency was being misused by women – Hence, each and every case has to be considered on its own merits. R. Srinivas Kumar v. R. Shametha (2019) 9 SCC 409 : [2019] 12 SCR 873; Munish Kakkar v. Nidhi Kakkar (2020) 14 SCC 657 : [2019] 15 SCR 169 – distinguished. Anindita Das v. Srijit Das (2006) 9 SCC 197 – relied on. [2023] 4 S.C.R. 473 473 A B C D E F G H 474 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2023] 4 S.C.R. Santhini v. Vijaya Venketesh (2018) 1 SCC 1 : [2017] 12 SCR 557 – referred to. Case Law Reference [2019] 12 SCR 873 distinguished Para 9 [2019] 15 SCR 169 distinguished Para 9 [2017] 12 SCR 557 referred to Para 22 CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Transfer Petition (C) No. 1475 of 2021. Petition under Section 25 and 151 of Code of Civil Procedure read with Order XXXVI B of the Supreme Court Rules for transfer of the M.C. No.331 of 2021 of the Hon’ble Family Judge at Mangaluru, Karnataka to the Family Court at Bandra, Mumbai, Maharashtra. Shankar Divate, Adv. for the Petitioner. Pai Amit, Ms. Pankhuri Bhardwaj, Abhiyudaya Vats, Advs. for the Respondent. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by RAJESH BINDAL, J. 1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner-wife seeking transfer of M.C. No. 331 of 2021 titled as “Dr. Edmond Clint Fernandes vs. Mrs. Delma Lubna Coelho” pending before the Family Judge at Mangaluru, Karnataka to the Family Court at Bandra, Mumbai, Maharashtra. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the parties met on Facebook in the month of December, 2019 and they got married on 05.12.2020 as per Christian rites and customs at Our Lady of Miracles Church, Mangaluru. 3. It is pleaded that after the marriage, the petitioner was living with the respondent at her matrimonial home at Mangaluru where she was ill-treated, insulted and humiliated by the respondent and his family members. She was accused for each and everything and offensive language was used against her. The respondent, in the pretext of giving her a break for 10-15 days, booked a one-way ticket for the petitioner and sent her to Mumbai on 15.01.2021. Thereafter, he disconnected all A B C D E F G H 475 relations with her. On 05.07.2021, after COVID-19 Pandemic restrictions were eased, the petitioner came back to Mangaluru. However, she was denied entry in her matrimonial home by the respondent and his family members. She was completely broken down. She approached the Police Station at Pandeshwar, Mangaluru and lodged a complaint. 4. The Superintendent of Police intervened and called respondent to the Police Station. The respondent stated that he has already issued a divorce notice and his petition seeking divorce is in the process of filing. Despite repeated requests made by the petitioner, the respondent did not mend his ways. 5. On 06.08.2021, she replied to the legal notice stating that she is ready and willing to come to her matrimonial house and wanted to live a happy married life. On 10.08.2021, she received summons of the Court along with copy of the divo
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.