Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:119167
270
TA-106-2023 -1-
2023:PHHC:119167
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
TA-106-2023 (O&M)
Date of decision: 12.09.2023
Jyoti
....Petitioner
Vs.
Ravinder Singh
....Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN
Present: Mr. G.S. Virk, Advocate
for the petitioner.
None for the respondent.
*******
ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN, J. (Oral)
Prayer in this petition is for transfer of the petition filed by the respondent-husband under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, pending before the Family Court, Ludhiana to the competent Court of jurisdiction at Panchkula.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that on account of matrimonial discord, the petitioner has filed a complaint under the Domestic Violence Act, which is pending before JMIC, Kalka, District Panchkula. It is further submitted that the petitioner is facing great difficulty in prosecuting the petition filed by the respondent, as there is a distance of about 120 kms from Panchkula to Ludhiana.
1 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 17-09-2023 09:14:06 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:119167 270 TA-106-2023 -2- 2023:PHHC:119167 Learned counsel has further contended that the petitioner is having two children i.e. one son, aged about 16 years and one daughters, aged about 18 years, who are living in her care and custody and she is facing difficulty to defend the case, as she has to travel to Ludhiana from her place of residence i.e. Kalka.
Learned counsel has relied upon the judgments Sumita Singh Vs. Kumar Sanjay, 2002 SC 396 and Rajani Kishor Pardeshi Vs. Kishor Babulal Pardeshi, 2005(12) SCC 237, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that while deciding the transfer application, the Courts are required to give more weightage and consideration to the convenience of the female litigants and transfer of legal proceedings from one Court to another should ordinarily be allowed, taking into consideration their convenience and the Courts should desist from putting female litigants under undue hardships."
Learned counsel has further relied upon N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs. A.S. Saravana Karthik Sha, 2022 Live Law (SC) 627, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under: -
"The cardinal principle for exercise of power under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure is that the ends of justice should demand the transfer of the suit, appeal or other proceeding. In matrimonial matters, wherever Courts are called upon to consider the plea of transfer, the Courts have to take into consideration the economic soundness of both the parties, the social strata of the spouses and their behavioural pattern, their standard of life prior to the marriage and subsequent thereto 2 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 17-09-2023 09:14:06 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:119167 270 TA-106-2023 -3- 2023:PHHC:119167 and the circumstances of both the parties in eking out their livelihood and under whose protective umbrella they are seeking their sustenance to life. Given the prevailing socioeconomic paradigm in the Indian society, generally, it is the wife's convenience which must be looked at while considering transfer.
Further, when two or more proceedings are pending in different Courts between the same parties which raise common question of fact and law, and when the decisions in the cases are interdependent, it is desirable that they should be tried together by the same Judge so as to avoid multiplicity in trial of the same issues and conflict of decisions."
As per office report, learned counsel representing the respondent before the trial Court has refused to accept the summons.
It is well settled that while considering the transfer of a matrimonial dispute/case at the instance of the wife, the Court is to consider family condition of the wife, custody of the minor child, economic condition of the wife, her physical health and earning capacity of the husband and most important, convenience of the wife i.e. she cannot travel alone without assistance of a male member of her family, connectivity of the place to and fro from her place of residence as well as bearing of the litigation charges and travelling expenses.
After hearing the counsel for the petitioner, considering the fact that the petitioner-wife will have to bear the litigation expenses and transportation expenses and in view of the judgments in Sumita Singh's case (supra), Rajani Kishor Pardeshi's case (supra) and N.C.V.
3 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 17-09-2023 09:14:06 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:119167 270 TA-106-2023 -4- 2023:PHHC:119167 Aishwarya's case (supra) passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, this Court deem it appropriate to allow the present petition, subject to the following conditions:-
1. The petition filed under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, pending before the Family Court, Ludhiana will be transferred to the competent Court of jurisdiction at Panchkula.
2. The District Judge, Panchkula will assign the said petition to the competent Court of jurisdiction.
3. The Family Court, Ludhiana is directed to transfer all the record pertaining to the aforesaid case to District Judge, Panchkula.
4. The parties are directed to appear before the Family Court, Panchkula within a period of 01 month from today.
5. The Family Court, Panchkula will make all the endeavour to refer the case before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre for exploring the possibility of amicable settlement between the parties.
6. The Court concerned, where the litigations between the parties are pending, will accommodate them with one date in one calender month.
Present petition is disposed of accordingly.
[ ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN ] JUDGE 12.09.2023 vishnu Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:119167 4 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 17-09-2023 09:14:06 :::