Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 6557 P&H
Judgement Date : 11 July, 2022
TA No.608 of 2022 (O&M)
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
TA No.608 of 2022 (O&M)
Date of decision: 11.07.2022
Bhupinder Kaur
....Petitioner
Versus
Gursukhraj Singh
....Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN
Present: Mr. Himanshu Chhabra, Advocate for the petitioner.
ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN J. (Oral)
Prayer in this petition is for transfer of the petition filed
under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, pending in the Family
Court, Bathinda to the competent Court of jurisdiction at Ludhiana.
Counsel for the petitioner has argued that on account of a
matrimonial discord, the petitioner has filed a petition under Section
125 Cr.P.C. and also got registered an FIR under Sections 406 and 498-
A IPC at Ludhiana.
Counsel for the petitioners has also submitted that the
petitioner is having 01 minor children, who is living in her care and
custody and she is facing great hardship to defend the case as she has to
travel from Ludhiana to Kaithal.
Counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the
respondent/husband has filed the petition under Section 9 of the Hindu
Marriage Act, as a counter-blast, before the Principal Judge, Family
Court, Kaithal.
Counsel for the petitioner has also argued that on account
1 of 3
TA No.608 of 2022 (O&M)
of a petition filed by the respondent/husband, the petitioner is facing
great difficulty in prosecuting the said case as there is a distance of
about 150 Kms from Ludhiana to Bathinda.
Counsel for the petitioner 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 has 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."
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 and in view of the
judgments i.e. Sumita Singh's case (supra) and Rajani Kishor
Pardeshi'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 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, pending before the Family Court, Bathinda will be transferred to the competent Court of jurisdiction at Ludhiana.
2. The District Judge, Ludhiana, will assign the said petition to the competent Court of jurisdiction.
However, liberty is granted to the respondent to revive this
2 of 3
TA No.608 of 2022 (O&M)
petition, if he intent to contest the same, provided that:-
(a) The respondent will clear all the maintenance amount, if any, in terms of a petition filed by the petitioner.
(b) The respondent will undertake to pay Rs.1,000/- per day, to the petitioner for attending the Court proceedings at Bathinda, on each and every date of hearing.
(c) The respondent will bring a demand draft of Rs.25,000/- towards the litigation expenses of the petitioner to pursue the case at Bathinda in case the respondent opt to contest this petition.
Disposed of.
(ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN) JUDGE
11.07.2022 yakub
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether reportable: Yes/No
3 of 3
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!