In Brief
A wife petitioned for transfer of matrimonial proceedings to a court nearer to her residence, citing travel difficulties. The Supreme Court dismissed the transfer petition, holding that inconvenience of travel alone is not grounds for transfer. However, the Court granted the petitioner the right to participate in proceedings via video conferencing at the nearest available location and to claim reimbursement of travel expenses when required to appear in person. The Court also noted its willingness to facilitate mediation if sought by the petitioner, establishing a balanced approach that respects both fair access and judicial efficiency in matrimonial disputes.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.