Manju Jain And Ors vs Uoi And Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 8168 P&H

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 8168 P&H
Judgement Date : 1 August, 2022

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Manju Jain And Ors vs Uoi And Ors on 1 August, 2022

TA-680-2022                                                      -1-



       IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                      CHANDIGARH

                                               TA-680-2022 (O&M)
                                               Date of decision: 01.08.2022

Manju Jain and others
                                                               ....Petitioners



                                         Vs.

Union of India and others
                                                              ....Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN

Present:    Mr. Tribhawan Singla, Advocate
            for the petitioners.

            None for the respondents.

                   *******

ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN, J. (Oral)

Prayer in this petition is for transfer of the petition under

Section 34 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, titled as Union of India

Vs. Padma Aggarwal and others, pending in the Court of Additional District

& Sessions Judge, Patiala to the competent Court of jurisdiction at Sangrur.

Learned counsel for the petitioners has argued that petitions

filed by other claimants/landowners stand allowed vide order dated

14.10.2021 passed in TA-191-2021 and other connected cases, by making

the following observations: -

"...Keeping in view the aforesaid facts, it is considered

appropriate to transfer the objections to the Court of

1 of 4

competent jurisdiction in the district in which the acquired

land is located. This order has been passed keeping in view the

fact that the owners who stand deprived of their land will get a

sufficient opportunity for proper adjudication of their claims

with regard to appropriate compensation.

While passing this order, this Court has not adjudicated

upon the territorial jurisdiction of any particular Court to

entertain the objection petition. It is expected that the

transferee Court shall take a holistic view of the matter

keeping in view the controversy involved. These proceedings

are being transferred in order to enable the Court to do

substantive justice..."

In the aforesaid order, it is held by this Court that as per policy

dated 11.10.2021, issued by the National Highway Authority of India, the

petitions will be transferred to the Court within the jurisdiction, where the

land is situated.

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

2 of 4

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 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, the respondents are served, however, there

is no representation on their behalf.

After hearing the counsel for the petitioners, considering the

3 of 4

fact that the petitioners 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.

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 under Section 34 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, titled as Union of India Vs. Padma Aggarwal and others, pending in the Court of Additional District & Sessions Judge, Patiala will be transferred to the competent Court of jurisdiction at Sangrur.

2. The District Judge, Sangrur will assign the said petition to the competent Court of jurisdiction.

3. The Additional District & Sessions Judge, Patiala is directed to transfer all the record pertaining to the aforesaid case to District Judge, Sangrur.