Shifali vs Ankur Madaan
2022 Latest Caselaw 8284 P&H

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 8284 P&H
Judgement Date : 2 August, 2022

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Shifali vs Ankur Madaan on 2 August, 2022

TA-807-2022                                                         -1-



          IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                         CHANDIGARH

                                                  TA-807-2022 (O&M)
                                                  Date of decision: 02.08.2022

Shifali
                                                                   ....Petitioner



                                            Vs.

Ankur Madaan
                                                                 ....Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN

Present:     Mr. D.S. Randhawa, Advocate
             for the petitioner.

                     *******

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

in the Court of Family Court, Kurukshetra to the competent Court of

jurisdiction at Fatehgarh Sahib.

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. at Fatehgarh Sahib. 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 100 kms between Fatehgarh Sahib and

Kurukshetra.

Learned counsel has relied upon the judgments Sumita Singh

1 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

2 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."

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-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

3 of 5

(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 of the Hindu Marriage Act,

pending before the Family Court, Kurukshetra will be

transferred to the competent Court of jurisdiction at Fatehgarh

Sahib.

2. The District Judge, Fatehgarh Sahib, will assign the said

petition to the competent Court of jurisdiction.

3. The Family Court, Kurukshetra is directed to transfer all the

record pertaining to the aforesaid case(s) to District Judge,

Fatehgar Sahib.

4. The parties are directed to appear before the Family Court,

Fatehgarh Sahib within a period of 01 month from today.

However, liberty is granted to the respondent to revive this

petition, if he intent to contest the same, provided that:-

(a) The respondent will clear all arrears of maintenance amount,

if any, in terms of a petition filed by the petitioner either under

Section 125 Cr.P.C. or Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act

or Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act.

(b) The respondent will file an affidavit giving undertaking to pay

Rs.1,000/- per day, to the petitioner for attending the Court

proceedings at Kurukshetra, on each and every date of

4 of 5

hearing.