Komal vs Sahil
2022 Latest Caselaw 1600 P&H

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
                      AT CHANDIGARH
238
                         (Through Video Conferencing)
                                                                   TA-19-2022
                                                   Date of decision: 14.03.2022

Komal                                                              .....Applicant
                                       Versus
Sahil                                                            .....Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL

Present :     Mr. Neeraj Sheoran, Advocate
              for the applicant.

        Mr. Ashwani Bakshi, Advocate
        for the respondent.
                            ****
MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. (ORAL)

The applicant is seeking transfer of a petition under

Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 bearing

No.DMC/820/2021 (Annexure P-1) filed by the respondent, from

Family Court, Rohtak to Family Court, Jhajjar where she is residing

after being ousted from her matrimonial home.

The sole ground on which the applicant is seeking transfer

is that she has no source of income and has been living at the mercy of

her parents in Jhajjar along with her minor son, who is just about one

year old. Hence, it would be very inconvenient and rather difficult for

her to commute with the infant to the Court at Rohtak on each and

every date of hearing moreso, as there is no direct bus from her village

to Rohtak.

On being put to notice, the respondent entered appearance

through his counsel.

Learned counsel for the respondent opposed the prayer

made by the applicant for transfer of the petition under Section 13 of

the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 from Rohtak to Jhajjar by urging that the

1 of 2

distance from Jhajjar to Rohtak was not 40 kms. but about 25 to 30

kms. He submitted that the applicant was intentionally wanting to get

the case transferred to Jhajjar so as to cause harassment to the

respondent.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

relevant material on record.

The Hon'ble Supreme Court in a plethora of judgments

including Neelam Kanwar Versus Devinder Singh Kanwar, 2000(10)

SCC 589 and Sumita Singh Versus Kumar Sanjay and another, 2002

AIR(SC) 396, in unequivocal terms has observed that in matrimonial

disputes between the spouses, convenience of the wife must be given

due consideration.

Hence, in the wake of the observations of the Hon'ble

Supreme Court coupled with the fact that the applicant has a one year

old child to take care of, who is totally dependent on her, this Court

deems it appropriate to allow the instant application more so, when the

case is still at the initial stage. Accordingly, the application is accepted.

The petition in question pending in the Court of Principal Judge,

Family Court, Rohtak is withdrawn from that Court and transferred to

the Family Court, Jhajjar for disposal in accordance with law. The

parties through their counsel are directed to appear before the Family

Court, Jhajjar on 18.04.2022.

14.03.2022                                  (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL)
Vinay                                              JUDGE
              Whether speaking/reasoned        :      Yes/No
              Whether reportable               :      Yes/No



                                  2 of 2