In a recent order, the Bombay High Court settled a jurisdiction tussle between a separated couple from Mumbai and Kalyan, directing that both their divorce petitions be heard together at the Family Court in Bandra. Justice Rajesh S. Patil ruled that since the husband’s petition was filed first, the wife’s later petition must follow it, as per the Hindu Marriage Act.
Background
The couple, Suprabha Nitesh Patil (27) and Nitesh Gajanan Patil (33), have been locked in a bitter legal dispute since 2022. Nitesh, who works in a car showroom in Mumbai, filed for divorce in the Bandra Family Court on December 5, 2022. Nine days later, Suprabha, a homemaker living with her parents in Kalyan, filed her own divorce plea before the Civil Judge at Kalyan.
Both later moved separate transfer applications Suprabha wanted her husband’s petition shifted to Kalyan, while Nitesh sought the opposite. Their lawyers sparred over whether the wife’s convenience or the statutory rule of “first filed” should prevail.
Court’s Observations
Justice Patil carefully examined Section 21-A of the Hindu Marriage Act, which governs the transfer of matrimonial petitions, and Section 24 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC), which gives courts general transfer powers.
“The use of the word ‘shall’ in Section 21-A makes it mandatory,” the judge explained, contrasting it with the discretionary “may” in Section 24 of the CPC. This, he noted, means that when two petitions are filed by the same couple in different courts, the later one must be transferred to the court where the first was filed.
The wife’s lawyer cited Supreme Court rulings emphasizing the wife’s convenience in transfer matters. But Justice Patil clarified that those judgments didn’t involve Section 21-A cases. “Those were under maintenance and restitution proceedings, not under Section 21-A,” he observed.
The Court also took note of the 50 km distance between Kalyan and Bandra. “Given the manageable travel distance, the wife can attend hearings and return the same day,” the judge said. To ease her financial burden, the husband was directed to pay ₹2,500 per hearing toward her travel costs.
Decision
The High Court dismissed Suprabha’s application and allowed Nitesh’s plea to transfer the Kalyan case to Bandra. The Kalyan court was ordered to send her case (HMP No. 2159 of 2022) to the Bandra Family Court, where Nitesh’s case (Marriage Petition No. 3540 of 2022) is pending. Both will now be heard together “by one and the same judge.”
The Court expedited the trial and permitted Suprabha to attend hearings through video conferencing when allowed by the judge. However, her request to continue interim protection for four more weeks was turned down.
With that, Justice Patil’s crisp order brought clarity to what had become a tug-of-war over venue, reinforcing that statutory procedure must prevail over convenience when the law so mandates.
Case Title: Suprabha Nitesh Patil @ Suprabha Anant Khot vs. Nitesh Gajanan Patil
Applicant (Wife): Suprabha Nitesh Patil, 27, homemaker, residing in Kalyan
Respondent (Husband): Nitesh Gajanan Patil, 33, employed in Sales Department, residing in Sewree, Mumbai
Date of Judgment: Reserved on 10 September 2025; Pronounced on 10 October 2025
