Divya vs Bhupender
2022 Latest Caselaw 7993 P&H

TA-1203-2021 (O&M)                                                       -1-

    IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND
                HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

                                                      TA-1203-2021 (O&M)
                                                 Date of decision: 28.07.2022

Divya                                                              ...Petitioner

                                        Versus

Bhupender                                                        ...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN

Present:-    Ms. Lipika, Advocate for
             Mr. R. S. Mamli, Advocate
             for the petitioner.

             Mr. Sunil Ranga, Advocate
             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 13(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955,

titled as Bhupender vs. Divya, pending before the Family Court, Gurugram

to the competent Court of jurisdiction at Karnal.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that on account of

a matrimonial discord, the petitioner has got registered an FIR under

Section 498-A IPC at Karnal, which is pending and as a counter-blast to the

same, the respondent-husband has filed the present petition under Section

13(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act at Gurugram in order to harass the

petitioner and the petitioner is facing great difficulty in prosecuting the said

case, as there is a distance of about 155 kms between the aforesaid two

places.

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the

petitioner is having a minor child, who is living in her care and custody,

1 of 3

TA-1203-2021 (O&M) -2-

therefore, it is very difficult for her to defend the said case at Gurugram.

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."

Learned counsel for the respondent-husband has opposed the

prayer of the petitioner-wife.

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 if the aforesaid petition is not transferred, the petitioner-wife will have

to bear the litigation expenses and transportation expenses and also in view

of the ratio of law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sumita Singh's

case (supra) and Rajani Kishor Pardeshi's case (supra), this Court deems it

appropriate to allow the present petition, with the following directions:-

2 of 3

TA-1203-2021 (O&M) -3-

(i) The petition filed under Section 13(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, pending before the Family Court, Gurugram will be transferred to the competent Court of jurisdiction at Karnal.

(ii) The District Judge, Karnal will assign the said petition to the competent Court of jurisdiction.

(iii) The Family Court at Gurugram is directed to transfer all the record pertaining to the aforesaid case to District Judge, Karnal.

(iv) The parties are directed to appear before the trial Court at Karnal within a period of 01 month from today.

28.07.2022                                     (ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN)
Waseem Ansari                                          JUDGE


                Whether speaking/reasoned                      Yes/No

                Whether reportable                             Yes/No




                                     3 of 3