Urgent need sc judgement copies on divorce transfer petition

1.    Having blood cancer child to look after by a respondent Husband is itself ground to deflect decision in your favor in concerned Court.

2.    Natural father’s who have minor’s custody with them can rely on Jaishree Banarjee Vs. Abhirup Banarjee [(1997) 11 SCC 107] to get proceedings transferred in their favour.

3.    Preeti Sharma Vs. Manjit Sharma [(2005) 11 SCC, 535] Held – ‘merely because petitioner is a lady does not mean she cannot travel'

4.    Anindita Das Vs. Srijit Das [(2006) 9 SCC, 197] Held - 'at one stage the Supreme Court was showing leniency to ladies. But Since then it has been found that a large number of transfer petitions are filed by women taking advantage of the leniency shown by the Supreme Court. On an average 10 to 15 transfer petitions are on board of each court on each admission day. It is therefore, clear that the leniency of the Supreme Court is being misused by the women. The Supreme Court is now required to consider each petition on it’s own merit. In this case no ground for transfer has been made out'

5.    Suggested to visit your District Court Library and get Xerox copy of above Judgments or if you have appointed a AoR to defend yourself in concerned Court then he must be having above Judgments.

I am alone with a blood cancer chid. no parents, no relative and wife left us 2 years ago.

 

when these facts are on record, no court will transfer the case.

take printouts of these judgements from internet and submit - such printouts are admissible.

or tell ur lawyer - he will do the rest.

Your queries have been rightly replied

Kindly note that I am NOT any third-party service provider or vendor who collects the court order for any financial gain...

 

Jaishree Banarjee Vs. Abhirup Banarjee

URL - Not available online

Preeti Sharma Vs. Manjit Sharma

URL - https://courtnic.nic.in/supremecourt/temp/tc%20117-11804p.txt

 

Anindita Das Vs. Srijit Das

URL - https://courtnic.nic.in/supremecourt/temp/tc%2019105p.txt

 

Mango

https://www.indiankanoon.org/doc/1091218/ Supreme Court of India Jaishree Banerjee (Smt) vs Abhirup Banerjee on 6 January, 1997 Equivalent citations: JT 1998 (9) SC 285, (1997) 11 SCC 107 Bench: A Anand, F Uddin ORDER 1. The petitioner is the wife against whom a matrimonial case, HMA No, 489 of 1996, has been filed by the respondent-husband under Section 13(1)(i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. That case is pending in the Court of Additional District Judge, Delhi, The petitioner seeks transfer of that case from Delhi to a court of competent jurisdiction at Varanasi where the petitioner is staying with a child of the marriage, aged about two and a half years on various grounds detailed in the petition. That the child of the marriage is with the petitioner and cannot be left at Varanasi if the petitioner has to travel to attend to the matrimonial case, is not in dispute. 2. After hearing learned Counsel for the parties, it appears appropriate to us to allow this application. HMA No. 489 of 1996 titled Abhirup Banerjee v. Jaishree Banerjee is withdrawn from the Court of Additional District Judge, Tis Hazari Courts Delhi and is transferred to the Court of the Presiding Officer, Family Court, Varanasi, for its trial in accordance with law. The Additional District Judge, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi shall send the record of the case to the transferee court without delay. The transferee court shall fix the date for appearance of the parties and intimate the same to the parties. 3. The transfer petition is allowed. No costs.

its favouring wife.

Other two cases are not favoring women -


1) Preeti Sharma Vs. Manjit Sharma (https://courtnic.nic.in/supremecourt/temp/tc%20117-11804p.txt)

Merely because the Petitioner is a lady does not mean she cannot travel to Muzaffar Nagar. At the highest she can be paid expenses for travel and stay.  We, therefore, direct that the Respondent shall pay to the Respondent and a companion travel and stay expenses on every occasion that the Petitioner is required to go to Muzaffar Nagar.


2) Anindita Das Vs. Srijit Das (https://courtnic.nic.in/supremecourt/temp/tc%2019105p.txt)

Even   otherwise,   it   must   be   seen   that   at   one   stage  this   Court   was showing leniency to ladies.  But since then it has been found that a large number of transfer petitions are filed by women taking advantage of the leniency taken by this Court. On an average at least 10 to 15 transfer petitions are on Board of each  Court  on  each  admission  day.    It   is,   therefore,  clear  that  leniency  of   this Court is  being misused by the women.

Mango