Bombay High Court imposes ₹1 lakh costs on husband who opposed wife's plea to transfer divorce case

The Bombay High Court on Monday levied costs of ₹1 lakh on a man for objecting to the plea of his estranged wife, a mother of their 15-month-old daughter, seeking to transfer their divorce petition from Vasai court in Thane to Bandra court in Mumbai. [Sarita Rahul Sharma v. Rahul Udayraj Sharma].Justice Milind Jadhav recognised the considerable hardships the young mother faces while attending the court with her infant, who requires ongoing medical care..The wife had cited the overwhelming challenges of doing an eight-hour round trip in order to attend court hearings, emphasising that travelling with her young child made the journey nearly impossible. "If the wife has to travel along with her infant/minor daughter, it would be all the more difficult for her to travel, since boarding and alighting from the local train on the western railway corridor at any given time during the day is an extremely difficult proposition considering that trains are overcrowded at all times," the Court said..The Court elaborated on the logistical difficulties faced by the woman, explaining that during the train journey, she would need to manage her infant, compounding her struggles. "From Vasai Road bus station to the Court and back, there are only two modes of public transport available namely the MSRTC buses which are always overcrowded and in the alternate auto-rickshaws which ply the said distance at an exorbitant cost," Justice Jadhav stated..Despite the husband's lawyer claiming he was willing to cover the wife's travel expenses, the Court found this stance insensitive to her situation."Financially, Respondent - husband is therefore well off. Merely due to that reason, Respondent - husband cannot insist that he will bear the travel cost of the Applicant – wife to attend the proceedings in Marriage Petition in Vasai. The submission made by Mr. Tripathi is without consideration of the Applicant’s case altogether. Not once has Mr. Tripathi considered the fact that the Applicant - wife is required to support and care for her 15 month old infant / minor daughter and if she is to attend the proceedings in Vasai Court, how and who would take care of the child in her absence.".Noting that the father has completely exonerated himself of his duty as a parent to the detriment of the mother and the child, the Court ultimately concluded that the award of costs was warranted."In my opinion, Applicant – wife deserves the award of costs as it would go a long way in ameliorating her hardship and difficulty in the interest of justice.".Advocate Nazneen Contractor appeared for the wife.Advocates RS Tripathi and Mohd. Shahid appeared for the husband..[Read Order]