Deepika Garg vs Vivek Garg And Anr
2022 Latest Caselaw 8170 P&H

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 8170 P&H
Judgement Date : 1 August, 2022

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Deepika Garg vs Vivek Garg And Anr on 1 August, 2022

TA-225-2022                                                       -1-



       IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                      CHANDIGARH

                                               TA-225-2022 (O&M)
                                               Date of decision: 01.08.2022

Deepika Garg
                                                                  ....Petitioner



                                         Vs.

Vivek Garg and another
                                                               ....Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN

Present:    Mr. A.S. Natt, Advocate
            for the petitioner.

            Mr. Rahul Singla, Advocate
            for respondent No.1.

                   *******

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, Chandigarh to the competent Court of jurisdiction

at Camp Court, Samana, District Patiala.

While issuing notice of motion, following order was passed by

this Court on 09.03.2022: -

"The applicant is seeking transfer of a petition filed by the

respondent under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955,

titled as "Vivek Garg vs. Deepika Garg" to a Court of

1 of 5

competent jurisdiction at Family Court, Patiala (Camp Court

Samana).

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the

marriage between the applicant and respondent was

solemnized on 20.04.2016. However, now the applicant is

living with her parents at Samana which is at a distance of

about 100 kilometers from Chandigarh, after having been

ousted from her matrimonial home. Learned counsel further

submits that the respondent has intentionally instituted the

petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act against

the applicant at Chandigarh. Still further, three other cases

between them (a petition under Domestic Violence Act, a

petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. and a case FIR registered

under Section 498-A, 406 IPC) are pending before the

Principal Judge, Family Court, Patiala (Camp Court at

Samana). Hence, the applicant would be put to great difficulty

and inconvenience as she would have to travel from Samana to

Chandigarh on each and every date of hearing in the petition

under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act.

Notice of motion for 17.05.2022.

Meanwhile, the Court at Chandigarh shall adjourn the

case beyond the date fixed by this Court."

Learned counsel has relied upon the judgments Sumita Singh

2 of 5

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

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

3 of 5

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 respondent No.1 has, however, opposed

the prayer.

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 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.

Aishwarya's case (supra) passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, this Court

4 of 5

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, Chandigarh will be

transferred to the competent Court of jurisdiction at Camp

Court, Samana, District Patiala.