Punjab-Haryana High Court
Navneet Kaur vs Harvinder Singh on 27 July, 2022
TA-210-2021 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
TA-210-2021 (O&M)
Date of decision: 27.07.2022
Navneet Kaur
....Petitioner
Vs.
Harvinder Singh
....Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN
Present: Ms. Pinki Mehla, Advocate for
Mr. Pawan Attri, Advocate
for the petitioner.
None for the respondent.
*******
ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN, J. (Oral)
Prayer in this petition is for transfer of the petition filed by the
respondent-husband under Section 12(1)(c) of the Hindu Marriage Act,
pending before the Family Court, Karnal to the competent Court of
jurisdiction at Pehowa, District Kurukshetra.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the
respondent is residing in Australia and just to harass the petitioner, aforesaid
petition under Section 12(1)(c) of Hindu Marriage Act has been filed at
Karnal. It is further submitted that on account of matrimonial discord, the
petitioner has filed a petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C., a petition/complaint
1 of 3
under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act and an FIR
No.697 dated 18.12.2019 under Sections 323, 34, 498-A, 506 IPC at Police
Station Pehowa. It is further submitted that the petitioner is facing great
difficulty in prosecuting the said case, as there is a distance of about 60 kms
from Pehowa to Karnal.
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."
As per office report, the respondent is served through his
mother, however, there is no representation on his behalf.
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
2 of 3
and travelling expenses.
After hearing the counsel for the petitioner, 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) 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 12(1)(c) of the Hindu
Marriage Act, pending before the Family Court, Karnal will be
transferred to the competent Court of jurisdiction at Pehowa,
District Kurukshetra.
2. The District Judge, Kurukshetra will assign the said petition to
the competent Court of jurisdiction at Pehowa.
3. The Family Court, Karnal is directed to transfer all the record
pertaining to the aforesaid case to Family Court, Pehowa.
4. The parties are directed to appear before the Family Court,
Pehowa, within a period of 01 month from today.
Present petition is disposed of accordingly.
[ ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN ]
JUDGE
27.07.2022
vishnu
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable: Yes/No
3 of 3
