Punjab-Haryana High Court
Payal vs Shubham Kashyap on 31 August, 2022
TA-817-2021 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
TA-817-2021 (O&M)
Date of decision: 31.08.2022
Payal
....Petitioner
Vs.
Shubham Kashyap
....Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN
Present: Mr. U.S. Rana, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Sant Kashyap, Advocate
for the respondent.
*******
ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN, J. (Oral)
CM-10726-CII-2022
For the reasons stated in the application, same is allowed and
date of hearing is preponed from 29.09.2022 to today.
CM stands disposed of.
TA-817-2021
Prayer in this petition is for transfer of the petition filed by the
respondent-husband under Section 13(1)(i)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act,
pending in the Court of Family Court, Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhri to the
competent Court of jurisdiction at Karnal.
1 of 5
Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that on account
of matrimonial discord, the petitioner has filed a petition under Section 125
Cr.P.C. and a complaint before the Superintendent of Police, Karnal. 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 65 kms
between Karnal and Jagadhri.
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
2 of 5
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.
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."
Learned counsel for the respondent has no objection in case the
petition filed by the respondent is transferred from Family Court, Yamuna
Nagar at Jagadhri to the competent Court of jurisdiction at Karnal, where
other litigations between the parties are already pending, however, it is
submitted that the Family Court, Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhri be directed to
decide the application with regard to preservation of call record. It is further
submitted that since in the order dated 31.01.2022, the Family Court,
Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhri observed that the proceedings before it have been
directed to be adjourned beyond the date fixed before this Court, no
effective order could be passed. Learned counsel thus prayed that the
Family Court, Karnal be directed to decide the aforesaid application
expeditiously.
3 of 5
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 parties, considering the fact
that issuance of notice to the respondent has the consequences of staying
further proceedings before the trial Court, otherwise the petitioner-wife will
have to bear the litigation expenses and transportation expenses and in view
of the fact that even in case notice of motion is issued, even the
respondent/husband has to bear the litigation expenses and in view of the
judgments in Sumita Singh's case (supra), Rajani Kishor Pardeshi's case
(supra) and N.C.V. 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(1)(i)(ia) of the Hindu
Marriage Act, pending before the Family Court, Yamuna
Nagar at Jagadhri will be transferred to the competent Court
of jurisdiction at Karnal.
2. The District Judge, Karnal, will assign the said petition to the
competent Court of jurisdiction.
3. The Family Court, Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhri is directed to
4 of 5
transfer all the record pertaining to the aforesaid case(s) to
District Judge, Karnal.
4. The parties are directed to appear before the Family Court,
Karnal on or before 07.09.2022 at 10.00 am.
5. The Family Court, Karnal 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.
The Family Court, Karnal is also directed to decide the
application filed by the respondent, for issuance of directions to the telecom
company to preserve the call record, expeditiously preferably within a
period of 15 days from the date of appearance of the parties.
Present petition is disposed of accordingly.
[ ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN ]
JUDGE
31.08.2022
vishnu
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable: Yes/No
5 of 5
