Topic
Forum shopping in Indian law refers to the practice of filing a case in a court perceived to be more favorable, often by exploiting territorial jurisdiction rules under statutes like CPC, HMA, or BNSS.
Punjab & Haryana HC prioritized the custodial mother’s financial dependency, the minor child’s schooling needs, and concurrent BNSS litigation in Karnal to override formal jurisdictional rules, setting a precedent for child-centric forum transfers in matrimonial disputes.
Delhi High Court dismisses writ petition where the material cause of action occurred entirely in Uttar Pradesh, reinforcing that jurisdiction under Article 226 requires the core dispute to arise within the court's territorial limits. The ruling bars forum shopping based solely on the respondent's registered address, impacting litigants challenging pan-India bodies headquartered in Delhi.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court transferred a Hindu Marriage Act Section 9 petition from Jalandhar to Faridabad, prioritizing the 11.5-year-old daughter’s residence and the mother’s financial dependency, alongside a pending maintenance petition under BNSS. This ruling reinforces that child-centric welfare and ongoing economic support obligations outweigh procedural convenience in matrimonial forum disputes, setting a clear precedent for petitioners in similar circumstances.
MP High Court reaffirms that domestic violence proceedings must be heard at the place of the aggrieved woman's residence, rejecting transfer pleas based on the accused's medical or logistical hardships. The ruling underscores statutory protection over procedural convenience, impacting jurisdiction in PWDVA cases.
The Andhra Pradesh High Court has ruled that logistical hardship or convenience of the accused cannot override territorial jurisdiction under Section 447 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. Joint trial is impermissible when the underlying charges in consolidated cases are legally distinct, reinforcing that jurisdictional integrity trumps procedural convenience in criminal proceedings.
Gauhati High Court holds that intentional filing of review petition after specific direction to appeal bars condonation of delay under Section 14 of Limitation Act.