The Court recognised the considerable hardships faced by the young mother attending the divorce proceeding with her infant, who requires ongoing medical care.
The Bombay High Court on Monday imposed a cost of ₹1 lakh on a man for opposing his estranged wife’s request to transfer their divorce case from the Vasai court in Thane to the Bandra court in Mumbai. [Sarita Rahul Sharma v. Rahul Udayraj Sharma]
Justice Milind Jadhav acknowledged the significant difficulties faced by the young mother, who has to attend court proceedings with their 15-month-old child requiring continuous medical attention.
The wife highlighted the immense difficulties of making an eight-hour round trip for court hearings, stressing that traveling with her young child made the journey nearly unmanageable.
“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 detailed the logistical challenges the woman faced, noting that she would have to care for her infant during the train journey, adding to her difficulties.
“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.
Although the husband’s lawyer argued that he was willing to pay for the wife’s travel expenses, the Court deemed this approach insensitive to her circumstances.
“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.”
The Court observed that the father had entirely neglected his parental responsibilities, placing an unfair burden on the mother and child, and thus deemed the imposition of costs justified.
“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.”
