Pushpinder Kaur vs Shingara Singh
2022 Latest Caselaw 10052 P&H

TA-985-2022 (O&M)                                                      -1-

      IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND
                  HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

106
                                                       TA-985-2022 (O&M)
                                                 Date of decision: 30.08.2022


Pushpinder Kaur                                                   ...Petitioner


                                        Versus


Shingara Singh Chahal                                           ...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN

Present:-   Mr. G. S. Thind, Advocate
            for the petitioner.

ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN, J. (Oral)

Prayer in this petition is for transfer of the Civil Suit No.

CS/49/2022, filed by the respondent, titled as Shingara Singh vs.

Pushpinder Kaur, pending before the Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.),

Jagraon, District Ludhiana to the competent Court of jurisdiction at Patiala.

Learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon order dated

26.08.2022 passed by this Court in TA-973-2022 to submit that on an

earlier occasion, a Civil Suit filed by the sister of the husband of the

petitioner has been transferred from Jagraon to Patiala.

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the

present suit, which is filed by the father-in-law of the petitioner, is also an

offshoot of the matrimonial discord between the petitioner and her husband.

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

1 of 4

TA-985-2022 (O&M) -2-

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 for the petitioner has further relied upon 2022

Live Law (SC) 627 N.C.V. Aishwarya vs. A.S. Saravana Karthik Sha,

wherein Hon'ble Supreme Court has held as under:

"9. 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 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.

10. 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."

2 of 4

TA-985-2022 (O&M) -3-

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 issuance of notice to the respondent has the consequences of staying

further proceedings before the trial Court, otherwise the petitioner will have

to bear the litigation expenses and transportation expenses and in view of

the fact that in case notice of motion is issued, even the respondent has to

bear the litigation expenses and in also in view of the judgments rendered in

Sumita Singh's case, Rajani Kishor Pardeshi's case as well as N.C.V.

Aishwarya's case (supra), this Court deems it appropriate to allow the

present petition, with the following directions:-

(i) The aforesaid Civil Suit No. CS/49/2022, pending before the Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.), Jagraon, Ludhiana will be transferred to the competent Court of jurisdiction at Patiala.

(ii) The District Judge, Patiala will assign the said petition to the competent Court of jurisdiction.

(iii) The Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.), Jagraon, Ludhiana is directed to transfer all the record pertaining to the aforesaid case to District Judge, Patiala.

(iv) The parties are directed to appear before the trial Court at Patiala within a period of 01 month

3 of 4

TA-985-2022 (O&M) -4-

from today.

(v) The Courts concerned, where the cases are pending between the parties, will accommodate them with one date in a calendar month.

Liberty is granted to respondent to revive the present petition, if

so advised.

30.08.2022                                     (ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN)
Waseem Ansari                                          JUDGE


                Whether speaking/reasoned                     Yes/No

                Whether reportable                            Yes/No




                                     4 of 4